| Show r i ii NO O VE i TRIBUNE G SE I C il i i r Up U to a Late Hour This After Afternoon Afternoon noon n on Jury Wad Half Not Made Mader Madeo o i ii I a r Its Report i rn MAY BE A DISAGREEMENT DISAGREEMENTs J 0 l ls i i ir i s I du d ga gaI Inters s 1 II 1111 t I i And 1111 turfs fur for furI forI et The nit I he I J I 14 i A Up UI to tp a n I late Ille hour thus afternoon no hlll had boon huun l en reached In III the libel r suit ault of ot William It Jt Jones Jr JI t tr the Salt Snit Tribune r although It vuis 1 expected that the tho Jury would be bu pro fro 1 t P 4 l parcel 1 with Its Us announcement nt III a ae ul III e r l most any 1111 time pi JUI i lOInS lp At 1 2 p m yesterday o afternoon Judge i Powers resumed his lib argument for far thu tho defense Iren In Joins case ease t I dI w j until 30 He lie Ie rc rt p ferret ferrod to the testimony of Mrs Irl Berry Berryh Herr Berr BerrI ii h I the cook conk r Bh the h was a n friend of tut lr 11 IF y i r Jams ram upon the stand without i I prejudice o and gate Kae her with J reluctance she phu testified to II having ji i I cooked ltd Lad meat at it the Instance nee of ot Ir Jones Jone also that some of or this meat i ii I which had been nerved on a t I i table Will tae ns returned mutton y I II roasts mcl nisi o been fen served nerved to Mr It i jie a aJ Tones Jonc but hilt none nono of or this meat lt ui J given In to the Una Inmates Mr Ir ar 1 t te J e lands testimony must stand as uN he ho tes tell testified J titled that Telford anti Mrs Irl 11 r khlon both nw sae II I the moot moat Infected i t with maggots g gI ets he hI would not have I I i named these th lIe witnesses he hI been j testifying to The evidence proved my I P snit It was Sens 1111 admitted by b t ws li y e J 1 counsel that skim milk mixed n with Ith h jj water luul Lean been given the thu t A man who vim would feed inmates of tut nn an i L Li i it OH nn Mr DIr Jones Junes hi l fed tell those of ot tho the Snit county Infirm iry ry Q 1 r would not hesitate to mear to tl stoles claims I not Justly due Si II J t COUNSEL SUSTAINS S H Ill sI n Any shove n Ii mans na na salary Is in an nn k o No fie mot man Is entitled to double pay puy 1111 because i e he chooses to work f during his vacation Tin The h pay roll tull al III allowing I I f lowing extra puy IU tor for services rendered p t n nf 1 I by hy con oyes during their heir vacation and Y by signed by hy Mr MI Tones JoneK was Wan Va u Il padded melded puy ay r f r j C i I j tell roll and tho the allegation 1111 1111 II on that that he ho padded padded I i the thu payroll In 1 sustained t I h n to the of ot perjury perJur 1 1 a I the judge wild enid It was made In the tho pop popular popular ular sense of ot false swearing dr a I snow falsely to not legally duey dueI due k i he ho mina vuis therefore guilty guilt of perjury In Ini y i ft fit I tho the sense stated l i no ho swore to tn n Ii claim f I i for US 1913 33 duo 1110 him for tor H days ser n r t i I a 1 Ices rendered during durin his Ills vacation 1 i thus this WAS wan not hot n a legal claim dalm and 1111 Mr Ir n n f I Tunes Jones constituted the offense i rr i a of or perjury perJur as ua It was n a sworn oath to lo ton AM I L k 1 n claim dalm not legally due duel 1 l l DEFINED Pf J i V Vt Vt t t i r The fhe Judge special strolls strew on this hili t i MF kit t f i definition of the tho term perjury and de declared declared j fl f R Rj r dared the Tribune used the tha word worl syn l with the term terns also swear swearIng swearIng 1 t j I Ing In all nil the articles complained of I i He lie declared that under this definition c J i of or the term lerm It was wnM not necessary to I e 1 f prove proe corrupt Intent This would be aJ tai I i f necessary were the charge of or perjury J preferred an till tint term Is la known knolln I 1 understood In the criminal code colle coder I r t v dr i r Counsel tar for defendant dosed closed 1 till i his argument by hy saying that i rl t I from the limes evidence es disclosed the I I tf ant I hs entitled to ta a verdict cI nf of no nn cause of or action nellon Mr Ir Jon e s n ni character eh i as brought to in the hearing was WI such ouch that he was wan not entitled d to u a 1 single lei 1 Sr ft cent cen for damages damage If It either cither Mr Ir 11 i I man or Mr 11 bo be mulcted n CL single p 9 jj t i 1 cent for In that cue cuve cJ e the free freedom freeL L I l tom dom of the press will bo be ended forever tor er erIn i ir iMF 1 y In Utah I l j LOSES i At 3 p in nr Judge Frick began 1111 the Iho t fleeing cloying argument tor for the plaintiff lie Ill lier r ri i i spoke until nearly C G lie He admit admitted admitted 1 J ted fed certain Irregularities on an the part of or I Mr Ir Jones Junes but hut declared they the did Ihl not lIot iI Involve criminal action Trie arrange arrangement i l r ment meat with Mr Ir d while Irregular t 4 I lar lac woe was not criminal and the thc evidence f I showed shoved that goods obtained for Mr Ir j r Jonas Jonos personal use were charged to i him him on Mr books When t H Salt lt Lake county paid Mr lr Jones 35 for tor i Yi j a 11 row there In Is no question U but Ihu Tho roun coun I J h i ty got Kot the best beet of ot that bargain To bo ho r r it I IH In true Mr Ir I tones lanei should p J j have 1110 turned the thu money In received from fromi i ill tilt the rude Hale of ot u p f n 1 cow to tn Mr De Ir snit and m received from the county Its lis warrant iI F for the thu payment of ot his own on cow Value ales I I w was 1111 ns given however for tor the money mono kept GI t I by b Mr Jones Janel and lint no theft was wait com corn committed f us II counsel for rOI defendant would i r you eu believe n t i r NOT OOT JONES FAULT 1 tIT tITi r i if f i Salt Halt Lake hake 1 ke county received US OR for tor torI or I j hogs hags which It sold olt to Mr Smith That 1 m 9 the Utter latter hall hail failed to give proper cro ern i tit on Oil hi hl his books book for tho the payment tJ was Wan 1111 no N h 1 fault of Mr 1 Jones that he 11 had hal his ale son ion ii enter Inter the proper credit b he baton fore forc bringing 1 the tho hook books It In court recta VII his hie own affair l e foi fur which Mr Ir Jonas wan wae In nn no nl senan a responsible yet jet et defendants counsel would hove have you believe he had hall doctored II the hooks books of or Mr Ir Smith In III order to cov coy cover ij er r up 1111 n II theft 1 Il r loner Horne Home tended that n nt 0 r 4 t t contingent I fund was provided Mr Ir Jonas Jone u Ar for us use In special rI i Expenditure from this fund were mad I l l by b Mr tones Jones under direct authority i I i j from th tile the hoard board of county commission If i i a cm run 11 and nn an of or these t i tur tures fl to th the county auditor was nut not te re 4 I f MF t 1 i l c i f fT t ry j i Judg Judge Towers lower IoV availed himself eit of or every e la to 10 extol the of or Blah t t t op Sherwood ns as 8 a III man of ot God Gal c If 1 n a sacred l p In the tho th thI i I i J 1 Church to l which plaintiff belongs Isar i ii d l be he It from rne nm m to detract from thi Y 1 but bul one this I I r I you to thi bud bad mat complained L J nf lit a the molten mutton they the sey m teal wa 1 bought was at the vry sery tm lIm time the charge Is In J made purchased from I Sherwood The testimony of or the Ih wit t r regarding ih the Ihl bad b 1 meat mut u need ed r I i I should he with the conduct of at r t said Why Wh If It l such lIuch uca malodor malodorous Pl I 1 one lUll toast met wits win served time lima aft after r time t 1 1111 these thel sei who win were employ 1 rl ed at the time Institution remain there y month aft r month You would think I il from their testimony t they the could coat not lot loti i r I endure to 10 live lire under such lIuch coalitions F ly I I Mm Mrs Miller who testified etl to had hn t meat mn it being ui used Uel d did lId not net leave lell the Institution tion voluntarily Sh She did dill not nol wish WIh to torS rS r leave the l Mr Ir 1 FIT only r left toft after a 1 controversy with Mr Ir Jones Jonese e f i Their conduct bolted boiled their statements i a COMPLAINED FIRST FInST FIRSTy y I was t x i r Commissioner Harker te that T tf l i ro no complaint over ever came amine to him of at the ti treatment of or Inmates nt nl the Infirmary s d i The Che Tribune worm was liS the first brat to lu make any an t t I Ift ft 1 v t J n was tvan on Oil n change In Sven desired for tor or political reasons no so someone hud had to tobe tobe u ube be blamed d for tor something The forequarters fore tore quarters of were bought sumo purls of or tin a 11 are not hot of ot the lie first lIl therefore tho the whole Is II nH n dog meat ment Mr Ir milked the rows Oils and ln l took the milk every d day 11 y to 10 the cellar lie He sold Id he tie sa eats av IV melt I In Inthe Inthe inthe the cellar rouret l with maggots goll he saw the meal meat every overy lima he hl aunt tn to the cellar tint li h he roust have seen en It be he before fore tore It became Infected and known that It was not no so O Infected when bought STONY tips Mis Miller te to extra beef beet beefsteak beefsteak steak behig served rv d on Mr Ir Jones Jone table If f there IK lit I nn anything thing wrong In provid providing ing log meat now and again for tor or vl lore lUrs and tul for or tho UIO help I then hen n let the odium fall on Mr Ir Jones There Is 19 no Iu but the nu Vas sue con cnn conducted ducted about an ae well is ae such Hueh an on can enn be Not ot only poor find lodgment there but weak minded in I nd oil also and worthless lazy lIay t y fellows some Homo of ot whom iia os In the testimony were we eie 11 th chronic runic HI kickers f kern Complaint in IH b made tint that Ih Mr rr Jonis kept some co coos s at III tho the Infirmary III II 1 The rue knew this and ami regarded d dIt It to the Institution A 1 large part of the milk wile was ns supplied the In Inmates mates and the to the county moro more than offset orr 1 the tho cost of keeping th the cows co s Jin tIt JONIS HAS mows According to coui counsel el for tor defendant lI Mr Ir Jones JOlle timid Ills his hl family faintly have no rights which Mr true obliged to tho public weal had luul tu to he hI sub Huh uli i served Thin Thle Is IN not nol the law the In Individual In Individual hOI has rights which must be bo pio tiro tee ted Judge Powers endeavored to con convince vince you nu that they did 1111 not nol Intend to Mr Ir JoneN with perjury niter after nil all It Is u II thing to charge char charU a U with perjury and they found themselves in III a ti hole They only meant In to charge with false e lug hilt The truth Is s that defendant counsel el after the time In III claim fur for tire days lIa services per performed performed formed termed by II Mr Ir JoneN at tit vacation time limo amounting to tn 1 decided to tn prefer a II linage I of ot perjury him The ThO fount county bouts bourd 1 n ten days va vu vacation cation to the and their eat anN arl II s were wore graduated terl with r pe t to this allowance This Thill time belonged tu to the thi If It they worked tor for th the county at lit such time they the were VerI entitled to extra pay lU sad tho the bourn board allowed fix six days lIay extra pay for fur ten days ser services services vices Mr Ir 11 Jones demurred to 10 this thill as nil ashe nehe he thought ten days da pay III should be he allowed al allowed allowed lowed The hoard board however hoV vcr allowed only elx Ix days pay HB nN they IIII did dill not wish to Incur tin time displeasure of or other em om employee WILFUL WILl UL ALLEGED III OI Defendants counsel willie addressing the Ihl Jury Jur nought lIou ht to leave leao the Klon that tint wilful and corrupt perjury had riot not teen been alleged against plaintiff hut but only a IL charge churgo of or false swearing It t l I is net Het forth In n the complaint that defendant admits It alleged aliened red and III lil tended to allege that wilful and corrupt perjury hud had beets been committed co III 11 It ted by plain plaintiff plaintiff tiff They The cannot escape this tact fact and they have utterly failed to establish tho they y hun proven no criminal Intent on the part pirt of plaintiff They are therefore liable for damage for tor li II libel libe bel be belA beA A good name is the best beet of ot nil all pos pON possessions sessions Whoever attacked Mr Ir JoneN before the Tribune Old hid Did 1 they shoW that Mr Ir Jones JoneN previous character was not good Kool 11 Xo No 00 they the could not lIot do It They The did lilt not bring any charge charce of ot abusive Ire ive treatment of ot the Inmates they could reald I riot not Mr Ir Jones JOliet never spoke n a r harsh wold word to any of or them yet jet It you would expect hanth treatment from a n aman annan man who would Mould l hi guilty of or the charges es ts sought ought to bo ba b established 1 against Mr Jones CLOSING ADMONITION The Judge closed closel clo ed by h urging the tho Jury to deal with the prow press us its II they the would have others other Beni with them to remember her ber thill that newspapers consisted of men like they could coull make tale takes nut and th did a make moke mistakes and when they tre l on tho Iho rights of the Individual they were wert liable Damage had hu l b helm beau n done dOIl to plaintiff In substance and he was entitled to a verdict awarding substantial indemnity A 1 travesty on justice to Individual rights would bo be committed If u II verdict awarding a n 1 nominal sum aunt were rendered ren rendered dered dorell |
