| Show 00 JOHN oHN G Ga GRAHAM IS Ii i Judge Burton of In Inton ton to pool OF l 1 1 tiny ii r t fu the Iral r to ih tu lit III tUtt C 0 on the Nih of With Mary A Lb Potter or for sin e judgment df the Wis pai thereof limit In the lilt liaise county of ISO days A of aI granted in order that the d e bill of I the of lb dell I the case caseto to the Stats u It pron meat Judge briefly the Ing that the had been in agaInst per of time court that beck tried by bya a jury and fau and that it new became tiIs the court to pasS sentence if he reAdy for said he was The inquired of Mr If thing to ea when ty Judge urton addressing the court in ald id that evidence and everything III l with time case cale Inlo trill nd of Justice would be met by I of a nomInal line n It to huh th till the jurors Were rt not fult fully u isa to lbs defendants guilt otherwise e the they Wi lit have l mended the I the mercy merey of at tM the court ourt Mr Ir nil tr said he wall wac wallo o I to the x of allY In this cess if for the defense w was dl ed with th States State evidence I the information and the verdict of 01 JI 1 hf he had hi his remedy In l appeal p l lie he ly Iy dell desired d to call attention to now was the the State had bad been put to In tim at tile tue Case Judge Burton Hurlon c tO 1 time the prose prosecutor e stating w OllIff were n 11 was al er r the t Mr U i was WBK a e ethe the court tied had In other ca cauce and Mr Ir case CaM was s net one that called for an any special consider tien Judge Norrell said Id he would hear what the hall had to ia on tile the clue question llon of at but 11 lie was wan not PrePared to No say that It have havlan an any hearing on the Ju of the court COST SUM OI 01 Continuing Mr Ir Putnam saId aid the 11 pie hearing had before Justice 1 roeer cost COlt the State The fb ex cx or of the trial the Items being witness and Jury f few we were U lie He hoped this the court would bear tbt iii tn In mind assessing the tine Mr Ir Putnam then paid hll hi re specs to Mr Graham who ho III he hall had openly and defiantly dIsobeyed the thi theIa Ia law fur for the hut three thre or el four years lIre The defendant Will was a man well known knon throughout the Stat tal It lie was WAI a man of 01 influence but had set I a ld bad exam le I for others open of 01 the tue law Jaw In would he to be put lut a asto astop sto stop to 10 and he belIeved belleM till the present was an opportune time for the Court to lend Its III Rid aid by the merit with the wilful and breakIng or of th the JIt law MAKES NO DISTINCTION i Judge Mid that tha se tar far Ita as he heI I we was concerned timers there would be no ta fa shown for M ho had made It a rule to ask alk mo inca ot of unlawful what theIr te as to Ut the future nit honor WAS that this Was as 00 for cor the reison that th this statuteS did not confer the ac u upon a court to Uk ask a quell ques lion J 1 mIght Just U as well continued Jud ask Alk A rain man convicted ot of petit flit larceny It If it II wu Wa hit intention to obey the law In the future all as to ask alk It ot of a mAn convicted oC tul Va habitation Both hive he broken the lAW lawand and aDd It if I put this the question to onda one class ot of offenders fairness that I PUt It to all III The court then fined the defendant S Sm Judge Burton Durton thereupon On I moved oved for a 11 thirty days II stay In order to pie pare And tilt file bill ot of exceptions which wan granted t ed edThe I The detente defense will rely ref chiefly upon the ot of the Information for a reversal In the higher GOurt It charged the defendant with committed the offense or of unlawful COhabitation In iii Salt Bait Lake county but the evidence showed that one wife fite lived In Utah county and the other In Bait lAke The defense moved to quash the informs Information tion on the that It Will was In ton con diet with the statutes Judge Norrell he motion hilt but at the paine IRme overruled the motion but at the same me proper of th the statute Ills honor abhor t today remarked that the detente defense was doing the proper thing to have hev the question tested In Ih the Supreme Court |
