OCR Text |
Show i HIM DAT; Active Work on the February ' Term of the District Court. Ike Dual Department! Begin to Grind on 8ohedule ' Time, BUSTING UP A QRASD JUBY- Tiio Attitiule of the Candidate With Reference to Polygamy Made An Essential Point In the Qualification Quali-fication of the Juror. UPON THE CRIMINAL CALENDAR. A Petit Jnry Drawn and Home Formal Order. Made-Th. President's Manifesto in Court. The active work of the February term began in both departments of the district court at 10 o'clock this morn-lug, morn-lug, Judge Kane opening his labors on the criminal calendar, and Judge Anderson An-derson taking up matters in law and motions. The former availed himself of the main temple while the latter opened op-ened his labors in the library. Towards To-wards both portals legal talent, witnesses wit-nesses and talesmen flowed in steady volume and the courts, after a recess and a desultory grinding for someday, presented their usual animation. The log began to roll in Judge Zane's department de-partment with the task of empannelling A (irand Jury. Assistant United States Attorney Critchlow conducted the examination, and the box was occupied by the following fol-lowing panel: George Moore, George Hall, James Sharpe, George Steele, T. C. Wright, C. E. Wantland, John Sharpe, Geo. K. Wallace, W. II. Dodge, Hiram P. Folsom, Win. J. Payne, J. L. Elison. The court Suppose a man were brought before the grand jury who had been practicing polygamy before the manifesto was issued The juror He would be guilty of having committed a wrong tl manifesto mani-festo would have nothing to do with his offense. It was legally wrong. Assuming there to be no national enactment, en-actment, no law of congress, how would it be morally? By virtue of the law of the land it would be wrong. What Is your personal belief? Morally I Do Hot 11.11... It to be Wrong-. Then the question is as a grand juror would you not be Influenced by your moral views? If I had any sympathies they would be with the accused. However, I would not let them warp my judgment. Did you believe polygymy to bo wrong Wore the issuance "of the manifesto man-ifesto and adoption of the resolutions by conference? No, sir; I didn't think it was. Not morally wrong? No, sir, I did not. But after the manifesto? Then it became a wrong. Then you think it was not a wrong llafor. tb. Mantfe.to, notwithstanding the condemnatory clauses of the law? It was wrong under the law. How about your personal views? I don't think it was morally wrong? Having taken the candidate over this rigid course tne court stated that it was of the opiniou that he would not make a qualilied juror, that he entertained a manifest leaning toward the accused and as there were a number of cases to come before the grand jury at its approaching ap-proaching session there was serious doubt as to bis ability to enquire into them without bias or prejudice. James Sharpe was accordingly excused. Mr. Critchlow Kwopening HI. Elimination of John Sharpe asked him, point blank, if it was not a fact that his altitude was reflected in that of the juror who had just been excused. The talesman answered that it was nearly so whereupon where-upon the challenge was urged. The court Do you believe polygamy to have been morally wrong before the issuance of the manifesto notwithstanding notwithstand-ing the existence of a law condemning it? The juror (patronizingly) Your honor 1 can hardly answer I'm in doubt, taking into consideration the belief of the parties The court The juror may be excused. ex-cused. T. C. Wright, William J. Payne and C. E. Wantland had qualified before Another Uambtr of the Church of Jesus Christ was reached in George ueorge itioore naa passea muster, and John Sharpe was called up to the catechism. After the formal interrogatories interroga-tories pertaining to citizenship, the Juror was led through the aisles of the Church of Jesus Christ and up to the rostrom. "Are you a member of the Church of Jesus Christ 'of Latter-day Saints?." asked Mr. Critchlow. "I am sir," was the prompt reply. - t Do you believe in the right of amatf to have living and undivorced ' More Than One Wile?" "I don't now." "And how longsince yon have formed that belief?" 'Ever since the law condemned it." "Do you know what the holding of the church is today with refereuce to polygamy?" "I do not." "What are your views?" "I don't believe it would be right now." "Then you have reference to a matter mat-ter of dales you believe it would have been right at one time; say before the E. Wallace a native of the territory. Mr. Critchlow Mr. Wallace do you believe it right to have living and undivorced un-divorced more than one wife? The juror (promptly) No, sir; I do not. When did you arrive at that belief? Since the law of '82; it was right up to . that period. There were certain conditions that made it right for a man to have more than one wife. The oourt What do you say of it . .now?. The juror I believe it to be wrong. Since when? More particularly since October last, .since the manifesto? Yes, sir. Do you believe it morally wrong now? Yes, sir. How long did that belief antedate the issuance of the manifesto. That depends on the date of The Supreme Court Decision. Then you govern your morals by the supreme court? Yes, sir. You believed the practice to have been morally right before the decision, that it was wrong in every sense. Personally 1 have considered law was enacted against iti" "Yes tjir." , 'You say," interposed the court, "that you don't believe it would be right to have more than one wife no matter at what time the marriage was contracted V" ' "It would not be right under present circumstances." "How does the church viow it?" 'I don't know." "Are you An omir In th.ChnrohT" "Not an active one." "What is your portfolio?" "I am an elder." "Is it not one of the duties of an elder el-der to inculcate the teachings of the church?" "It is not compulsory." Mr. Critchlow What do you understand under-stand the effect of the reoent manifesto, the so-called manifesto, upon the creed of tho etiurch as to the doctrine of polygamy? The juror I've heyd very few express ex-press themselves. I guess the practice would be in violation of the creed. "How about unlawful cohabitation?" "It would bo wrong." "How about the manifesto with ref it wrong ever since 1 understood under-stood the law. I believe what the law upholds to be good morals aud what it condemns, immoral. Mr. Critchlow insisted upon his challenge, chal-lenge, urging the same reasons as those preferred against the Sharpes, and Mr. Wallace was excused. George Hall and William II. Dodge were examined and passed when Mr. Critchlow submitted that Juror Wantland wanted to be xcused as he w:is due on A Delicate Mission, the consummation of which would require re-quire two weeks. A smile mantled the faces of those who had been admitted to the innermost recesses of Mr. Want-land's Want-land's heart, the court detected the fact that Cupid was behind the request and Mr. Wantland was permilted to depart. The jurors were excused until 2 o'clock when the work of empanneling a petit jury was begun. The jury having been secured the case of The United States vs. John Beck, charged with unlawful cohabitation, cohabita-tion, went to trial the defendant pleading plead-ing not guilty. Before Anderson. The following orders were made before be-fore Judee Anderson today: II. B. Claplin & Co. vs. Simon Kell-ner; Kell-ner; set for hearing Monday, February Febru-ary 23d. erence to it?" "It has set it aside." "Does the creed Recognize Polygamy as right or condemn it as wrong?" Well sir, I don't know." The juror was challobged and James Sharpo a member of the Church of Jesus Christ and one of its staff of teachers was reached. Mr. Critchlow- Do you believe it right for a man to have living and undivorced un-divorced more than one wife? The juroi Not under present conditions. con-ditions. "How long since you arrived at that conviction?" "Since the enactmtnt of laws prohibiting prohib-iting it " "When was that belief fully developed?" devel-oped?" "Always with mo individually my own conduct supports that." "Is it not a fact that it was not until October last, when The Manifesto was promulgated, that you arrived at that belief?" "Possibly; polygamy was permissive until October. I accepted that declaration declara-tion as the suspension of the practice of polygamy through the voice of the church. . My understanding is that it applies to the practice of polygnmy." A challange was lodged against James Sharpe. i , Henry U. Nugent vs. Elizabeth Gates; defendant allowed ten days additional time to answer. United States vs. Utah Central Railway; Rail-way; demurrer argued and submitted. Maay A. Morrison vs. Wm. J. Harvey; demurrer overruled and defennunt allowed al-lowed ten days to answer. Rebecca Praser vs. Henry Trasser; decree granted. John Reese vs. Wasatch Mining Co.; pwised for the term. United States vs. Certain Real Estate; get for Saturday. Old Jordon M. & M. Co. vs. Niagara Mining & Smelting company, set for Saturday before Judge Zane. Victoria Copper Mining company vs. Wm. Hows, et al.: stay of twenty days to tile appeal bond. Hamilton National bank vs. Richard W. Mcintosh; all defendants except Seavy allowed ten days after notice is served of filing undertaking in which to plead. E. S. Carlisle vs. Blue Mountain manufacturing company; passed for term. Christine E. T. Johnson vs. Matilda Turn rose et al; samp order. F. H. Payton vs.Whito & Sons & Co.; same order. P. H. Barker vs. White & Sons& Co.; same order. (ieo. A. Mears vs Jno. J. Daly; same order. Louis Beret et al. vs G. S. Erb et al.; ordered to show cause Feb. 21 and in meantime restraint is granted. Dina Martha Smith vs Alma Smith; decree granted and alimony in the sum of J'-'O per month. t |