| OCR Text |
Show THE SPRY AND BREEDEN CASE. It was inevitable that the outrageous attempt of Spry and Brecdeu to influence in-fluence Judge Howell politically iu a ruling of his court should como up in this campaign. This is tho first time siuco tho occurrence that any elcctiou ho3 como on where tho consideration of that outrago would bo at all appropriate ap-propriate Tho matter was disclosed in The Tribune August 5, 1906. where At-lornoy-General Brccdcn mode confession confes-sion that he and Marshal Spry attempted at-tempted to iurlucnco Judge Howell from a partisan standpoint as to his decision ou a. motion then pending in his court iu the suit against Chambers, a member of tho city council of Ogdon. Marshal Spry and Attorney-General Breodeu, it appears, 'went to Ogdon aud labored with Judge Howell to decide that motion iu a way that would be to the advantage of the Hopublicau party. That was openly aud avowedly their erraud, aud opouly and avowedly they placed their persuasion per-suasion for the Judge to make his ruling on the partisau basis referrod to; that, if he decided in ono way on that ruling I ho Republican party would bo injured, whereas if he decided another an-other way there would be no injury to tho party. Thero was not tho least concealment at that time, either of the visit, of the motive for tho visit, or of the argument argu-ment presented to Judgo Howell as the reason why he should decide the motion mo-tion pending before him on partisan Hues. It was frankly confessed by Attorney-General Brcedcn, and Judge Howell made a public statement to the same effect. And now Judge IIowcll is up for reelection. re-election. Ho confessed that he allowed these persons to approach him with the political argument referred to as to what he should do on a motion then pending in his court. At tho time Judge Howell intimated very strongly that he would cite thoso gentlemen for contempt because of their presentation presenta-tion of the partisau view of the caso to him in the consideration of that motion. mo-tion. Judge Howell never did cite them for contempt. Aud now tho question is, why ? It has been claimed in behalf of Marshal Spry and Attoruc'-GcncraI Breodcn that Judge Howell sent for them and asked their opinion as to how he should decide that motion. Wo havo ncvor believed that to bo true. And '0t if it is not true, it is hard to account for the fact that .ludgc Howell neglected to cito them for contempt. But if it is true, which heretofore wo havo refused to believe, then Judge Howell himself is tho man who is in contempt of the public, of the dignity of his court-, and of himself as Judge. It is a scandalous case as it stands, aud certaiuly something should be done to put it ou a proper basis. Judge Howell has refused to vindicato himself him-self by the proper procedure, and now it would seem the right thiug for tho people to vindicate his court by ousting him from it, and putting ou t.he beuch a man who has a proper idea of the rights, tho dignity, aud tho judicial requirements re-quirements that ought to bo present on that beuch. |
