OCR Text |
Show THE LAWYERS' SUIT. The Contempt Proceeding Progressing Pro-gressing Slowly. Judge Boreman occupied the bench again on Tuesday morning, in the oontempt matter, Judge Emercon still being engaged in hearing a euit in the judges' chamber. When the hearing commenced, there were present Judges Sutherland, MBride and Hagan of the plainlihY counsel, and Judges Bennett &. Harkneda and Messrs. Shceka & Rawlins, of tbe executors, ex-ecutors, aijd Messrs. WilliamB, Richards, Rich-ards, Duaenberry and Miner for the rrustee-in-Truat. Hon. George Q Oannon and Brigham Young, of the defenae, were present. All tbe piirtiea being ready. Judge McBride naked to have Brigham Young snorn, which was done. He testified aa to the inventory of ap praesement. The pjainliff wished to introduce the inventor ot tho estate as evidence, to whioh Judge Bennett objected because he did not think this bearing would go so far as to bring out the items in the general inventory, : md that this hearing could not be j general, but confined to the matter j ! immediately in hand j Judge Sutherland rt'.utsd ihit the j complaint was both i;e aural and specific, and the issuance of the warrant, war-rant, according to precedents, would necessitate such a general and specific hearing, as would reach the whole scope of the property in their poaaeB sion. Judge Harknesa stated that it was rather unphasant to ba continually nmkirjg objections throughout a caBe, but the argument of the other Bide perhaps foreshadowed their line of prool so clearly that it might be better to settle now, and once for all, as to bow far the proof should go. He staled that first he and his co-counsel had questioned whether they were j really called upon to answer the complaint. com-plaint. Tbe bone of contention in this case waB certain lunds or properly pro-perly of which they know nothing, aa it was understood between counael that the question did not refer to tbe properly then in course of being transferred. The ground of tbe plaintiff plain-tiff that we know whether the property pro-perty has been turned over and should ahow that we had done so, is a very unusual proceeding. That would necessitate an accouuting, which it was well known, was never entered into in beariuga for contempt, He stated of what tho general trial for contempt should be, which made the acope of the inquiry very briet, and it was pointed out that this course had not been pursued by the plaintiffs. If tbe delenae, upon tho demand for certain property which they had not in their bands at that time of the demand, were to voluntarily refund such money, it would be an sdmis sion that they bad made improper expenditures and tbey would thereby take away ail their ground for defense. Yet this is tbe very thing they were required to do according to the plaintiff. plain-tiff. Judge Williams made some objec- j lions to the submitting of the inven- tory aa testimony against John Taylor. Its immediate application to John Taylor being denied, Judge WilliamB desisted from further remarks. Judge Sutherland then Bta'.ed that the opposing counsel had not correctly cor-rectly anticipated their side, as they did not propose to go into an accounting. account-ing. It it shoulu appear that money had been paid out improperly, he would claim that the money eo paid out was their own, and that these executors alill held the funds of the estate, and should turn them over to the receiver. Inasmuch as the information in-formation is Bolely with them, and if they showed that all the property in their hands had been transferred, tbev would have made an explicit denial, but as it is, the denials are wholesale. As to the giving up ol properly on tho part of the executorB being awaking away of their defense, counsel could hardly be sincere in bis proposition. Your honor knows, and counsel know, that the turning over of property to a receiver in no wiae affectB the ultimate result or the real merits ol the trial. With regard to the course to be pursued in this matter, it was biought with a view to coercing the defendants to turn over such property as they might decline to transfer, and was not con-' fined to euch brief inquiries as stated by the delenpe. The judgo read from authorities to shuw that the present was a civil inquiry, and in the 67ent that it wa decided against the defense, they wero to be confined until they complied with I tie induction induc-tion ot the court, when the confinement confine-ment would immediately end They ' did not propose to enter into any geueral argument, but to coerce tho I defeudauta to turn over euch prop-. prop-. ertv aa thev had failed to transfer. Judge Bennett stated tbat as ho now understood the matter it was the intention of the hearing to compel tbe executors to turn over to the receiver re-ceiver a certain amouut alleged to have been paid lor the private debts of John W. You ii!, and for a certain par centago taken to themselves for principal parsing through their hands. Iu connection with his urgu men I, Judge Bennett read the answer of the executors to the complaint. com-plaint. He also staled that they were ready at all times to Bhow what property there was still in tbe estate, but thoy did not desire to do it in a matter of contempt, but with a view to showing what property is in the estate. It waB a physical impossibility impossi-bility lor the executors to deliver over, as a portion ol tbe estate, such money as was paid out for the debts of John W. Young and as a per ccntage to themselves, if any such exnenditureB had been made. They desired to avoid even the appcarauce ol contempt, but they desired aleo to make their showing us a showing and not for contempt. Our point is to divorce the one proceeding from the other, and to bhow specifically what property it is desired should bo turned over. Practically we atand in contempt, aa we are here under arrest and in bonds, and the alleged intention not to make the olieuse punilivo but coercive, is ol littlo moment to the defendant, as he ia, as before stated, practically in a criminal relation. Tho hearing Bhould so proceed that the defendants could be allowed to decido for themselves them-selves whether tbey could voluntarily turn over Buch property; while, in its present form, the court can only pass upon whether or not the defendants are in contempt, and gives them no opportunity to show whether it was proper for them to convert the property prop-erty and refuse lo turn it over to the receiver. . JuJgn McBride stated that in the view ot the case taken by his opponents, op-ponents, all it was necessary for a person to do to avoid turning over property to a receiver, was simply to convert the property. The present object was timply to prevent such a possibility- Mr. RawHua closed the sreument in ihe mtier. 1 he point made by him was that the order directing direct-ing the transfer of properly to Hie re ceiver cculd only apply lo pioperty and assets in tbe position of the ex ecutora at the lime tbe order wss made; that ihe court had no power to direct that assets wuich bud previously been converted should be turned over; and that tne defendants could noi be held in contumacy con-tumacy lor converting property prior to tbe making of such order directing the transfer of property to the re ceiver. Judge McBride then read the warrant. war-rant. Judge Boreman Btated that the discuesion had taken a wider range than was necessary, as it applied simply to the admissibility of the inventory. in-ventory. Aa all the property of ths estate could be shown in the inventory, inven-tory, and in view of the fact that be did not deem it necessary that affidavit affi-davit should be eo explicit, he thought it proper to admit the inventory. The defense excepted, and the inventory, and its supplement were ottered in evidence. There were also offered, under objeslion, three accounts current cur-rent of the estate, the first on September Septem-ber 1st, 1877, to September 30lh, 1878; tbe second, from April 30tb, 1878, to December 31st, 1S7S; the third, carrying tbe accounts to February Feb-ruary 17th, 1S79. A number of exhibits ex-hibits wero also introduced. "Exhibit "Ex-hibit A," supplemental to the inventory; "Exhibit B" accounts and claimB tbat have been allowed and paid; "Exhibit O," a list of property; "Exhibit D," relating lo the support sup-port of minor children; "Exhibit E" relating to tho distribution ol property to heirs and its valuation, S8iSJ,000; "Exhibit F," real estate reserved for Bupport ol widows, amounting to $149,000. "Exhibit G" is a list of property remaining on hand alter paying dehta, and em brace? a large portion ol what has been turned over to the receiver. A number of questions were asked of Mr. Young, who stated that property prop-erty kept turning up for mouths alter the original inventory had been made. The Utah Central bonds were among the property thua discovered; were in several lota; were discovered within a year alter the filing of the inventory; inven-tory; the exhibits were made by Mr. Webber; tbe bonds were Hied prior to the distribution to the heirs in 1878. The affidavit of the executors, applying for letters of administration and showing tbe value ol the property prop-erty at that time was offered, but objected to by the defence and the objection sustained. Iieces3 till 2 p.m. Alter recesB the examination of Mr. Young continued: Remember a oiaim against the estate made by the Noble County Bank, Ohio. Objeo-tion Objeo-tion whb made to the questions; overruled; over-ruled; exception. I can't say that X can separate that claim from others: I may have seen it in connection with others. A great many exhibits were introduced intro-duced in evidence which related to accounts claimed to be barred by the statute of limitations, and also to the debts ol John W. Young paid out of the funds of the eetate. Mr. Young and Mr. T. G. Webber were examined exam-ined as to them. They are so numerous numer-ous and would be bo unintelligible unless published in full, which would not only be useless but also impossible, impossi-ble, that we refrain from giving tbe result of the examinations. Mr. LeGrande Young was examined aa to his connection with the transaction relative to the payment of the debts of John Willard Young. Hon. George Q, Cannon was then sworn: I have examined tho inventory; in-ventory; was gone a portion of the time the business of the estate was being administered; I was bere when the supplemental inventory waa drawn up, which wua done under my direction; the appraisers wero A. O. Smoot, N. Groesbeck aud Theodore McKem; we Bold the stock of Zion's Savings Bank; think $1,000 waa borrowed from thia bank to pay the expeneea of LeGrandc Young, who went cast on buainosa : I think we sold 100 of the Utah Southern ; bonds to take up a note; we sold the other bonda, 6omo when I was away; we bad no bonds and had none in pledge when the oomplaint waa hied ; at tbe time of the filing of the complaint I think we had some Utah Western bonds; I don't know whether they were given to the receiver; all the residue, after settling the estate, was amassed together, and has all been transferred to the receiver; I know of no tmutdera Bince I left being made prior lo my return, excepting ex-cepting such as was made to the receiver; tho property conveyed to the church was done in payment of alleged debts; in the distribution of the estate, we did not charge tbe bulk ol John W. Young's debts to him; wo got the bondB in return for paying bis debts; I advised tbe payment of these debts, and if there is any responsibility re-sponsibility attending the transaction it chiefly falls on me. What 1 did, L did with a view to following out the wishes of the testator; I had no wish to aid JohnW.; John W. wob not present when wo made the deeds to the church; there ffere two classes of heirs, and it was deemed advisable to Give the orphans $21,000, they giving a releaso in full to us; tb03e that had mother's getting $18,000, the remainder remain-der of toe property to bo divided among them on tbe demise ol their mothers; the theatre waB a'eo deeded tn ihe church; we paid to Z. Q. M I. $75,500; it was paid while I was absent; ab-sent; as far 1 understand no accounts were paid that were outlawed; if bo, it was done in ignorance; I do not know that at the time tbat account was paid Z. C. M. I. owed the estate $100,000; I understand that there is Htill an amount due us as executors; we received 3 per cont. on tho principal prin-cipal and interest that passed through our bands, including that paid lor John W. Young's debts. Mr. Can-non'a Can-non'a attention was called to the inventory iu which two noleB for $50,000 were held by the late President Presi-dent against Z, C. M. L, and he stated that aa far as he knew now they were oaid. Tho plainlifV attorneys aaked if the defense would bring into court tbe books from which the amounta were taken, aud the defeuao anawered that they would bring in all they could. There was some talk aa to the propriety pro-priety of allowing ho vouchers to re-maiu re-maiu where any one could handle them, as they were very valuable and numerous, and it was determined that a receipt should be given lor them as they are taken out. Adjourned till 10 o'clock this morn-iog. |