OCR Text |
Show THE FOWLER CASE Our readers probably remember the announcements of the indictment and arraignment of John Fowler of Odgen, on a charge of polygamy, in the Third District Court of this Territory. <br><br> Since our last issue a new and important development has been made in the case. The attorneys for the defense, Messrs. Richards & Williams of Ogden, have filed a motion to set aside or quash the indictment in the case, the ground upon which the motion was based being give with great clearness and at some length. It is set forth that the indictment was not found, indorsed and presented, as proscribed by law, by a legally constituted grand jury. The notice of the drawing of the grand jury was not given in the manner provided by law, as nowhere in said notice does it appear that the grand jury to be drawn for was for the District Court for the Third Judicial District of Utah Territory, nor does it appear in what county said notice was given. <br><br> The notice states that eighteen names will be drawn from the jury box, when the law provides that the jurors so drawn and summoned shall constitute the regular grand jury, and only fifteen jurors would be legally drawn, or could legally constitute the regular grand jury, or the panel thereof; and nine of the names of said grand jury that found said indictment were drawn from the jury box without any notice whatever. <br><br> The eighteen jurors whose names were so drawn from the jury box did not and could not legally constitute the panel of the grand jury for the said term of said court, although each and every one of them had been legally qualified to act as such grand jurors for said term of this court. R. D. Clark was excused at his own request because he was the superintendent of the Stewart mines and mills, he not being a miller, nor disqualified in any way whatever. Thompson Ritter was accepted and impanelled [impaneled] on said grand jury instead of Thompkins Ritter, whose name was on the jury list and was drawn from the jury box, when no such name as Thompson Ritter was on the jury list of this court, or was drawn from the jury box. <br><br> After six grand jurors had been accepted, including said Thompson Ritter, and all the others, of the eighteen names on the original list so drawn for the panel of said grand jury, had been rejected, the court ordered that twenty additional names being drawn from the jury box, and summoned, which was done, when it only required nine jurors to complete the panel. <br><br> After accepting four jurors from said list of twenty additional names, the court ordered that nine additional names be drawn from the jury box; and on the same day, and before the nine persons whose names had been so drawn were summoned or examined on their coir dire, the court ordered that eight additional names be drawn from the jury box. <br><br> The following named persons, to wit: John Barton, O. D. Hendrickson, Samuel A. Wooley, David E. Bowring, Thomas W. Lee, A. L. Fuller, Frederick Goss, William Falkfeld, Robert Patrick, William Kidd, Samuel Bringhurst, Jr., George Coulam, H. W. Hannibal, William P. Affleck, and J. Hyrum Grant were each and all illegally rejected from said panel of said grand jury, because they believed that polygamy was authorized by the divine laws of God, although they stated on their coir dire that they would if on the grand jury, find indictments under the United States statute against polygamy or bigamy if the evidence before them showed that any person had violated said statute and was liable to prosecution under it. <br><br> Alexander Majors, a member of said Grand Jury, was not when said indictment was found an eligible juror as provided by law, because he had not resided in this Third Judicial District six months next preceding the time he was elected, to serve as a juror; and because he was not then and has not since been, a tax payer in this Territory; and because he had served in this Court as a petit juror within two years next preceding the impaneling of said Grand Jury and the finding of said indictment. C. M. Chiberson, a member of the Grand Jury when the indictment was found, was not an eligible juror as provided by law, because he had served as a petit juror in this court, within two years next preceding the impaneling of said Jury and the finding of said indictment. Boliver Roberts, James M. Barlow, L. Goldberg, L. B. Mattison and J. F. Bradley were neither when said indictment was found, eligible jurors as provided by law, because their names had been drawn from the jury box during the April term, 1879, of this court, as appears from the record thereof, and they were summoned to serve as petit jurors at said term, and were in attendance upon the court as such, but their names were illegally returned to the jury box and were again drawn therefrom as grand jurors for this September term, 1879, and they were members of the grand jury that found and presented said indictment. <br><br> The points are well and strongly made; and nothing can be clearer than that the present grand jury of this district is an illegal body. But, notwithstanding these manifest reasons, there is now little assurance that the indictment will be quashed. So long have wrong and injustice held sway in the district courts of the Territory in all cases where the "Mormons" were involved, that now to look for fairness and equity, seem folly. Messrs. Richards & Williams prepared and presented a powerful document, one which, in any court where law and justice ruled, would gain the object sought; but it is possible that they and their client will hear the motion overruled, and will have to look to the public alone for commendation and sympathy. |