OCR Text |
Show THIRD DISTRICT COURT. A very large audience rushed into tho court room yesterday morning as soon as the doors were open, in the expectation that sentence would be passed in tho case of ThomaH Hawkins, A considerable proportion of the audience au-dience wero ladie3. A largo crowd surrounded the hall desiring to obtain admission, but tho judgo ordered that no moro be admitted as the hall was regarded unsafe, Even reporters attempted at-tempted in vain to get within the sacred sa-cred precincts. Mr. Miner, of counsel for Thomas lawkins, moved the court to discharge the defendant for the following reasons: reas-ons: That the verdict rendered by the jury in said case is such that no judgment judg-ment other than to discharge tho defendant de-fendant can be rendered thereon, said verdict being in legal contemplation and effect equivalent to a verdict of "not guilty." That the statutes of Utah Territory in such caso caso made and provided require tho jury in all cases not capital to find in their verdict, if against the defendant, tho nature and extent of punishment. That tho verdict of tho jury in said case does not stato the nature na-ture or extent of punishment as appears ap-pears by the verdict rondercd by the jury in said caso, ag by tho statute aforesaid prescribed, and that said verdict ver-dict is therefore equivalent to a verdict ver-dict of not guilty. They therefore ask for tho discharge of the defendant and without delay. Mr. Miner argued this motion, citing sec. 11th of an act regulating the mode of procedure in criminal cases, pago Cj, statutes of Utah, as follows: Sec. l i. The verdict of tho jury Bhall bo mado by their imanimouB agreement, and in writing and bo presented pre-sented to the court and read in tlte presence of tho accused: and in capital cases shall read "guilty or "not guilty;'' guil-ty;'' and in other cases if against tho accused, shall state the amount of damages and tho nature and extent of tho punishment. Mr. Baskin followed in reply to tho defense, aud the court ovorrulcd the motion in tho following words : It has bocn my intention from the beginning, it is still my intention, to allow tho counsel for defenso to raiBO overy possible point in this caso and to discuss it just so long as they please without limitation. In regard to tho question now before me, I must say that no legislature, whether Stato or Territorial, no legislature controlled by a constitution, has a right to giro to a court or a jury unlimited control over the property, liberty or lives of accused ac-cused individuals. If the point raised by Mr. Miner is well taken, then the jury in this caso might have rendered a verdict setting tho damages against tho defendant at one million dollars or five million dollars, or any other sum; and tho nature and extent of punishment punish-ment at one hundred years' imprisonment; imprison-ment; or they might on tho other hand havo stated tho damages at one cent, or tho extent of the punishment at one minute's imprisonment in their, not discretion but, caprice. No legislature legis-lature has the right to givo either to a court or jury any such unlimited I power, and I must ovorrulo tho mo- ; tion." The counsel for defense uot having been furnished with tho notes of the official reportor, in order to make up ! their bill of exceptions, the court post- poncd further proceedings in the case ' of Hawkins until Saturday next. Tho remainder of tho day was occupied in tho civil caso ol Sarah A. Cook vs. Brig-ham Young. Mrs. Cook occupied the witnc ss stand during a part of the afternoon. |