OCR Text |
Show THE ELECTION ARRESTS. Mayor Wells Discharged by Commissioner Com-missioner Toohy. Yesterday morning the oft-postponed examination of Mayor Wells, on tho charge of resisting and interfering inter-fering with Deputy U. S. Marshal Orr on election day, came up before Commissioner Com-missioner Toohy, and was deposed of, theMayor being discharged. Messrs, Carey & McBrido appeared for the prosecution, and Messs. Sutherland and Snow for the defense. Witnesses wero examined on both sides, but the evidence was much the same as that given in tha police examinations, noticed no-ticed in the Hekald at the time. The testimony was contradictory throughout, through-out, the witnesses for the prsncution swearing that Orr and other deputy marshals were duly sober and orderly on election day, and those for tho defense that the reverse was the case. At the conclusion of brief arguments by the respective counsel, Commissioner Commis-sioner Toohy delivered tho following opinion, which wo tako from the Eccniifj Xeics: COM.M1;S10KR TOO 11 V a RtUNG. The evidence in tnis case, though not veiy extensive, is somewhat conflicting. con-flicting. I am to assume that Mr. Wells stood in the door of the polling mom. A3 rl Mfri twl hi" mrwl rf thn Ti-it nesses; Mr. Orr came up and was asked ask-ed by Mr. Wells if he was Milton Orr, and that Mr. Orr replied in tho affirmative; affir-mative; that Mr. Wells then told him to go away, which Orr refused to do, saying he was a deputy United States , marshal, and that ho had a right to enter there. That ie about the substance sub-stance of the difficulty. It appears then that Mr. Orr makes an attempt to enter the hall, and Mr. Wells resists; re-sists; Mr. Wells has his cane, which is raised, some say menacingly, others say that it was not, and so far as the cano part of the business is concerned, con-cerned, 1 am under the impression that there was no actual menace, and that the resistance occurred in another anoth-er way. The complaint charges, directly, that Daniel H. Wells, Mayor of said city (Suit Lake City), by threats, menaces, etc., resisted an officer, Mr. Orr, in the performance of his duty under an act of Congress; and, further, that the said Daniel H.Wells did assault affiant with a cane. I am satisfied that that part of the assault has not been sufficiently proven for me to consider. Hence it remains for me to determine what guilt there is in this charge against Mr. Wells, who is charged as Mayor of Salt Lake City, and I recognizo him as being present at the City Hall, at the time tiiis difficulty occurred, in that capacity. capa-city. Whether it be good law or not, I am willing to give my opinien that it is. Mr. Wells, as Mayor of the city, had an official right to be at the City Hall; every citizen hasa private right to be there on the day of elec tion, and I think it was a fit place for the Mayor to be at officially on that day. I am also under the impression that the Mayor had been misinformed as to the facts surrounding the polls on that day; but that would be no excuse for an infraction of the law afterwards. I am satisfied that he went tothe City Hall believing that there was a disturbance there, or that there was likely to be one; aud that acting under this impression, he took ms piace in tnc uoor oi me polling room. It happened that the first objectionable person who came along I was Mr. Orr, and the colloquy which ! has been detailed by several witnesses took place. Mr. Wells asked Mr. Orr who he was, and he replied, and then Mr. Wells objected to his entering enter-ing the polling room. I am told that immediately before this thero wits perfect peace and tranquillity, both in and out of the room; and as you permit mo to go to 1 the evidence presented in a former 1 case, I find that there were several deputy marshals inside, enough to protect the peace, and to preserve the : purity of the ballot box. There wero iwo or more deputies inside at that j moment, and 1 do not see what , necessity thero was for Mr. Orr to go in there. I do not deny his right to enter, nor question his motives, and let it be well understood under-stood that I do not approve of the ro sistance of the mem but I conclude that the Mayor, acting upon whatever what-ever impressions he had, as I have signified before, did interpose his official offi-cial authority, under these impressions, impres-sions, to prevent what he believed to bo imminent, namely, a disturbance. The rccriminations and ascerbities that were interchanged by the parties, do not have a feather's weight with me. It has been testified that some of the parties were intoxicated, and just as good proof has been presented that they were not. I am satisfied that there was no serious drunkenness drunken-ness on the part of the officer?, either of the City or of tho United States, from the Mayor down on one side, to the Marshal down on the othtr. It was as sober a gathering of citizens as is apt to occur in any community of as the effect of this melee between Mr. Welte, the Mayor, and Deputy Marshal Mar-shal Orr, is the worst part of it, but that does not come into this case at all I am sa tit lied, I am also satisfied that the evidence docs not present to me probable cause lor the detention of Mr. Wells. I think that the resistance, resist-ance, or the assault, or whatever other oHense was committed, if any at all, does not amount to sufficient to warrant war-rant me in holding him, and ho is Idischarged. |