| Show Impartiality SALLLKE CITY February 231885 To the Editor of THE HERUD In all criminal prosecutions the Constitution Con-stitution gives to the accused the right of trial by an impartial jury How is this Constitutional right interpreted in Utah under Republican rule in the hands of Zane Dickson Varian Mc Kay Gilson Co A Mormon is accused of marrying more than one wife or of cohabiting with the same after having married them His case is considered by the I United 5tatesCommi3sionera prejudiced enemy awaiting his opportunity to show his prejudice and enmity and the accused are bound over to await the action of the Grand Jury Grand and petit juries are filled up sometimes by open venire contrary to law and always with every individual who is a true and faithful Mormon or who believes be-lieves as Mormons do carefully squeezed out In other words the Junes are carefully composed of men who are all antiMormons as nearly as can be and Mormoneaters as nearly as can be Such juries arc to all intents and purposes packed juries im panollod purposely to indict and convict Are they impartial juries within the meaning of the Constitution Consti-tution They are prejudiced enemies These juries are not chosen from the community at large but from a very small minority class of the community expressly to consider the case of member mem-ber of the very large majority class against whom the minority are generally gene-rally very much prejudiced and many very bitterly prejudiced Is such a jury what the Constitution means by an impartial jury If so then words have no meaning Can a prejudiced jury possibly be an impartial jury Can a jury of enemies possibly be an impartial impar-tial jury Yet by such juries Mormons are indicted tried and convicted It is entirely safe to say that such a trial is an unconstitutional trial and that soc long as so-c methods are persisted in a Mormon so accused in the ZaneDick i son court will never have a constitutional constitu-tional trial the opinions of all the lawyers and decisions of nil the courts in the country to the contrary notwithstanding notwith-standing When strong prejudices against the accused exist in the minds of the jurymen jury-men it is not to be expected that they will be impartial But when all the jurymen are strongly and most of them bitterly prejudiced against him it is impossible for them to be impartial There would be more probability of thc jury being impartial if onehalf were prejudiced for and the other against the accused for then accusedh the prejudices of the onehalf might counteract the prejudices of the other half Such an idea and such counteraction counter-action are more consistent with the intent in-tent of the jury provisions in the Poland bill But that intent is completely nullified nul-lified under the present rule which is more in consonance with the expression of an eastern newspaper concerning the Mormons We do not mean to give you fair play we mean to put you down Now a Mormon is indicted by juries of prejudiced enemies before a judge who is a prejudiced enemy and with prosecuting attorney and aids and all the court officers prejudiced enemies all chock full of prejudice and enmity towards the accused What chance of a fair and impartial trial under such circumstances Is not such a trial a mockery Is it not a disgrace to the age and the nation Yet such is Republican rule in Utah Thank heaven the Republican Re-publican party will be buried next week CITIZEN |
