OCR Text |
Show COURT PROCEBWMttS. Third District Court. fclcKuan, C. J. Presiding. MACCU TERM EIGHTH DAY. Tuksday, Match 9Lh, 1875. Court convened at 10 o'clock a. m. C. C. Eddy vs. Humphrey Rogers; the jury canto into court and filed ' their verdict for tho plaintiff; judgment judg-ment was entered in accordanco with tho verdict. Stringfellow Brothers vs. J M. Cain el a.; plaintiffs' motion lor a temporary tempor-ary restraining order to prevent defendants de-fendants tearing down a certain wall adjoining tho store of tho former, was denied; defendants wero ordered to protect plaintiffs' property lrom unnecessary un-necessary damage by reason of removing re-moving the wall in question. Kte Flint us, Jeter Clinton et al.; Robertson & McBrido and Morgan for the plain tiff, Sutherland &. Bates and Snow for the defendants. A jury for trying the cause was drawn, when defendants de-fendants interposed the following challenge to the array: And now at this day, to wit: at a.ilt Liiiko city, Utah, on the Dlh day of March, 1S75, comes as well the said plaintiff as the said defendants, except E. M. Cass, by their respective attorneys, and the jurors of the jury empanelled in tho cause being summoned, sum-moned, also come and hereupon tho said defendanls.except said defendant Cass, challenge the array of tho said panel because they say: 1st. Tnat in the mouth of January, 1875, tho clerk of the Third district court, in said Utah territory, and the probate judge of Salt Lake county, in wtiich the district court is now being next thereafter held, did not prepare or make a jury list fiom which grand and potit jurors could.be orawn to serve in the district court of said Third district as required by law in this, to wit: Said clerk and probate pro-bate judge did not in said month ot January alternately seloct and list the aggregate of two hundred names of male citizens of the Untied Slate who resided in the said district for the period of six months, and who could re td and write in the English language. 2d. That at the drawing of tho grand aud petit jurors before tho meeting of this March term of this court, to serve at said term twenty - three jurors were first drawn to serve as grand jurors after I wiiich twenty-four jurors wero drawn to serve as petit jurors at said term. And the said defendants further say that tho jurors empanelled for the tri;d of tho above emilled action were drawn from the imperfect and irregular irregu-lar jury list made in said month of January; that they are twelve of the persons drawn to servo as petit jurors at this term of the district court, but only eight of them are of tho first eigtiteen of such jurors so drawn. And this the said defendants are ready to verify; whereforo they pray judgment so that the said array may be quaahed. To which plaintiffs counsel demurred de-murred as follows : Now comes the plaintiff and demurs to tho challenge of defendants to the array of the jury and lor grounds stated that the same is insuflicent inj law, and shows no good grounds for Raid challenge. The court sustained the demurrer, overruling the challenge; defendants excepted. The jurors were sworn on their voir dire, when the plaintiff's courtel read the following affidavit: Kate Fliut, of Salt Lako county and territory aforesaid, being first duly sworn according to law, states as follows : I am the plainliffin the above entitled action; that said action ac-tion is brought to recover the value of certain property belonging to mo and which was destroyed by order of Jeter Clinton, one of tho defendants, with the aid and assistance of the oher defendants, as she is informed and verily believes, and for trtble damages by reason of such destruction; destruc-tion; that she is informed and be lieves that said delendants are each and all Mormons, and members of a politico-ecclesiastical community or association calling itself the "Church of Jesus Christ ol Latter-day Saints;" that she is informed and believes that said community or association teaches its members and followers that their highest duty as members ot the communiiy at large is to aid and atsist their brethren belonging to said organization, and that this duty is above all others that may conflict with it; that it teaches its members and followers that they must in all ; things obey the counsel given them by their superiors in said association, and that if this counsel is in conflict with even the law of tho land, or the duty of the citizens it must bo obeyed on peril of lemperal persecution and eternal damnation; that said association teaches its members and followers that all human civil government is wrong and cannot command rightfully right-fully their allegiance or obedionco, and their duty is to submit all controversies con-troversies to tribunals organized by this association or community, and that a voluntary submission to the civil tribunals is wicked, and justifies the expulsion from the society, ol the person so doing; that said association teaches- its members and followers that all persons who do not belong thereto and submit to its decrees are Uantiles, ana nave norignta except, such as the said association is willing to grant, which concessions must have the endorsement ot. the tribunals tribu-nals of said community above referred re-ferred to; that this affiant verily believes be-lieves that the believers in said political po-litical and ecclesiastical organization and doctrines, totally repudiate the binding authority ot all courts of justice not established hy said society and repudiate the power of said courts to instruct the juries therein or to prouounco the law so as to bind the consciences or control the acta of said juries, when tho same come in conflict with the in'.ereats or wishes ot said association or its mem-beta; mem-beta; that said Jeter Clinton i?, as affiant is informed and believes, an older, viz: an officer ot said orgauiza tion; that said McAllister is or has been a "bishop's counselor," an officer offi-cer in said organization, having au thority over its members, and now holds and exercises authority therein, and that tho remaining defendants are all members of said community, but whether they hold any official position therein affiant canuot state; that affiant is informed and bolievcs that said de-truetion of her property was the result of an order to that effect emanating from tho authorities ill said association, and was made with their sanction, approv-d and endorse ment; that this affiant is not a member mem-ber of said association, aud is known as one who is opposed lo the same, nnd has incurred its displeasure and hostility, wherefore affiant suites that, she is informed and believes that sho cannot havo a fair and impartial trial before any jury which is composed in whole or in part of members of said society or organization known as Mor mons, nr mom tiers of the Church of Jesus Christ cf f-atter-day Saints, and praye tho court to bo permitted to chAlloiine any juror called in this action who may be a member thereof, as for cause. Kate Flint. m Subscribed and sworn to I I be lure me this 9th day of 1 L,S- March, A.D., 1S75, r Euw. B. McKean, Clerk, per Willis P. McBrido. Deputy Clerk. Judgo Sutherland, for tho dafense, objected both to tho reading and filing fil-ing of tho affidavit, on the ground that it was not prool in the form as required by law to establish bias in tho minds of jurois. The court decided de-cided that tho affidavit might bo filed for preservation, but declined to rule upon any other point at present; defendants excepted. Tho jurors sworn wero then examined na to their competency to serve on the panel, as follows : Charles Ells was questioned in the usual manner as to his knowledge of the case, whether there was any prejudice pre-judice in his mind against either party to the suit; and was finally asked if ho were a member of the church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Tho defense objected to this imi : icstion, on ino ground tnat it did ii-jt tend to establish either of the statutory causes of disqualifications of jurors. The court said that ahmding alone it did not establish cither of the grounds of disqualification, but it might be followed by eoino question that would, and upon tho plaintiff's Wiunsel stating that he intended to follow it by other questions te show the incompetency of the juror if he were a Mormon, the court overrulod the objection. Defendants excepted. Ells answered that ho was not a Mormon. He was then asked whether wheth-er if it should be established that tho plaintiff kept a house of prostitution lie could bring in a verdict fur her accord inc tn the law and pviden. Defendants' counsel objected, and objection sustained by the court. Plaintiff txceptetl. Juror passed. Oeorgo M. Oltiagor answered satisfactorily satis-factorily the usual questions propounded pro-pounded to a juror on his voir dire examination. Being asked if he were a Mormon he answered in the affirmative, when plaintiff challenged chal-lenged him lor cause, on the ground that ho was incompetent to sit in the case. Defendants objected and arguments by counsel ensued, plaintiff's plain-tiff's counsel reading from Orson Pratt's a Mormon elder writings to show that the"Kingdom of God ' was held superior, both in temporal and spiritual affairs to tho "man-mado" or civil or human governments. Judge Sutherland, for tho defendants, objected to Pratt being read or referred re-ferred to as if it sought to show what "Mormontsm" taught, it could have nothing to do with the bias of jurors. If Pratt wre introduced he wanted to know who ho was and what was his authority to teach, etc.; he also wanted proof of tho genuine-nsd genuine-nsd of the book. If the doctrines set forth in tho book were not correct cor-rect according to Mormonism he wanted to bring forward counter evidence. The court would not admit ad-mit the writings of Pratt as evidence, but allowed counsel to read them in illustration of his argument. After the reading, Sutherland objected to all that had been read and moved that H be stricken out; objection sustained sus-tained by the court. McBride also nllurtd to rend from "Government of God," a pamphlet by John Taylor, another Mormon elder; objected to and objection sustained. Sutherland opposed the challenge to the juror: "first, because tho only testimony on the part ot the chat lender is that ot the j juror, who testified that ho had no prejudice for or against the parties; second, the statute prohibits by implication im-plication the discharge of any juror for constructive bias arising from holding other than the relations mentioned men-tioned in sec. 103 of the statute; third, the affidavit which haa been read and filed was filed before the challenges commenced. It has not been offered as any part of the testimony testi-mony on this challenge, and it is not admtssable. It is not of tho character indicated as tho proper and necces-sary necces-sary testimony upon challenges by tb statute " The court: "The juror Ottinger j flays on his examination 'I am a member of the Mormsn chuch;' plaintiff s counsel challenges him on that ground. Tho challenge is over- , ruled." T ie juror was further questioned by McBride as to whether he believed any authority had tho right to control his action as a juror, except as to the law as given by the judge. The jurcr said he did not ; and being further interrogated said that ho believed it to be his duty as a juror to mako no distinction in bis judgment as between a Mormon and non-Mormon; and ho knew of nothing in the Mormon teachings that would cause him to discriminate in favor of ft fellow-Mormon. Juror passed. The following jurors wera ques-tlnnnl ques-tlnnnl liv nlfuntifi'n counsel as above. the Mormous answering in substance the same as Mr. Ottinger had done. Stephen F, Nuckolls, a non-Mormon; George E. Bourne, Mormon; Hiram T. Shurtliff, non-Mormon; DeWitt C. Thompson, Mormon; (Joseph Seigel, Sei-gel, non-Mormon; Daniel Cram, non-Mormon; non-Mormon; William Nay lor, Mormon; B. M. Callahan, non-Mormon, was challenged by the defendants, on the ground that at the time the demolition demo-lition of plaintiffs property by defendants de-fendants occurred, he had condemned the act as outrageous, and the work ot a riotous mob. Challenge sustained. sus-tained. Robert Camm, non-Mormon; Albert W. Davis, Mormon; Joseph Peck, Mormon. The panel being lull tho peremptory peremp-tory challenges commenced. Plaintiff Plain-tiff challenged Davis, aud Jesse Weat, Mormon, was drawn front the box, examined and passed. Defendants challenged Ells, and Michael Holdon, Mormon, was drawn and passed. Plaintiff" challenged Peck, and Frederick Fred-erick Peterson, Mormon, was drawn and passed. Defendants challenged Seigel, and W. J. Hooper was drawn. He was challenged for cause by plaintiff, he having at one time signed a petition to the city council, praying for the removal off, Commercial" Commer-cial" street where his shop was located lo-cated or abatement of plaintiffs and another house of prostitution. Challenge Chal-lenge sustained. Defendants except-l except-l Hrinchurst. Mormon, drawn and passed. Nay lor, Mormon, was challenged by plaintiff, fttd the regular reg-ular panel having been exhausted, John P. Harlow was drawn from the box containing tho original list of 2(H) I names. , The court ordered that Harlow be summoned to appear at 10 o'clock on Wednesday morning, to which time court adjourned. |