Show THOSE PONDEROUS OPINIONS As a matter of record ord ora we have published lmh ed in full the opinions of the judges I 1 of the supreme court of the territory T r n the cannon and musser calbes ca hes they can cannot not as a whole c be placed in the category of racy read reading ing even for legal ef fusions which at best do do not come under the head of lively literature the documents furnished by y associate justice powers have the lne ine merit of clearness this result is at t twined il ed by close reasoning and shod od cons construction traction the quality of perspicuity is on the other nand conspicuous bous f for or its absence in the opinions of tiie the other two judges the redundancy of words in th that it of the tile chief justice being specially bewildering his honors lio iio nors habit habie babl babi of resorting ta to a too plentiful infusion of parenthetical interjection gives a laby xin thian aspect to ius jus productions creating d a meandering sensation in the r reader ader that super induces mental wear baess in the extort to grasp his meaning some of tile the main points involved had been previously decided in the iwer dwer court by the majority of ghesu the supreme court this being the cas ewhen ule fie proceeding came up on appeal for tor f or review the task before their honors was an easy one it was merely to go over ground round they had traversed on a lower judicial fudi cial clai plane and attach their kador tador endorsement to it in a more diore exalted station of course there was one out of the three judges who WAS not already committed upon the points at issue but being in the minority his position could not aff affect act the r result autv one bayor the other consideration e of this fact will show that tiie tile beneficial prospects of the defendants i i 11 those cases to have their condition bettered b by having another decision from functionaries function aries who had already decided were not enormous and thus i i tile tiie beauty and effectiveness of the farritor ial lal system of jurisprudence aptly illustrated however the review is not sot without iti it redeeming features the one judge who did not git nit in the capacity of a judicial officer practically endorsing nis his 0 wn pvn doings gave a ringing dissenting opinion in the musser case and a semi dissenting one in the cannon case dase it Is to be regretted however that jud judge jude e rower power view of the edmunds bawls law is of the same contracted character as that held by the other two J judges adges he maintains as they do that the third section providing for per s ans convicted ol 01 cohabiting with more than one woman was intended by congress to apply to mor mans oaly and was not aimed at persons guilty of sexual immorality it is difficult to see how such a construction can ean cande canue be placed upon the law jaw when the statute itself is silent upon the subject giving no intimation that a strained meaning should be given to the word cohabitation in order Wen to enforce force it but while the dissenting opinion of judge powers shows that the present uta judges are a unit regarding the application of the law as qualified by what they claim to be the intent of congress he I 1 is wide apart from frow his judicial associates in his views regarding the procedure of the courts in the class ol 01 cases arising under the C edmunds dl act settling upon the character and aim of the law he sets out upon the theory that defendants in cases of this clas sare actually entitled to lofair fair fain trial this is a i decided tion upon the tactics of the present anti antl I 1 mormon I 1 crusade in which the whole judicial structure has hat ha been transformed into a machine the phrase adopted some time since as a qualification for jury men tells the wholesale in sympathy wit lithe prosecution it is indeed refreshing to observe that the first democratic judge appointed by the tile present administration has the inde oen dence to take the ground that a lormon placed un on trial in the courts of utah has some rights that are entitled to respect we jve do not propose to review the positions taken on the several issues involved in the opinions ions lons of the judges but one or two special points are de deserving servin of particular mention ref referring erring to ahat t that of judge powers in the bius musser mussen ser sen case he held that the court should have given the instruction desired by the thet defense to the effect that it should be presumed that at the date of the edmunda edmund law going into force those living in poly polygamous gainous relations batio us ceased t the he occupancy of that status the evidence in the musser case had extended back for years prior to the passage of the act hence defendants conduct previous to his course being rendered criminal by law was applied to his dama damage chief justice zane hanein n a way that 13 shows ig 0 his intense bias holds that his conduct previous to the passage of the tha law should be considered as Vs pointing to what his conduct was likely to be subsequent to its enactment common sense with which law should harmonize would suggest that no actions of a defendant performed before such condu cois ofis rendered malum should be used to his disadvantage on his trial otherwise there is an innovation upon the general principle at ia law nv that a person is innocent until proved guilty to use his innocent conduct in order to fix alx or at least lead to his guilt is surely incompatible with this legal proposition without ut a direct allusion by woods wolds judge powers delivers delivery a forcible thrust at the absurd crusade theory of 8 separation ep of plural wives f from rom their husbands by what has been denominated in crusade parlance eudicia ju dicia adjudication on of course he holds to the self evident truth that there can be no le legal al divorcement he maintains that in order far a man who has been living and cohabiting more than one woman as wives to conform to the edmunds act his deport toward hn plural wives must be of the nature of that of a man toward a woman from whom he has obtained a decree 0 of f divorcement divorcements divor cements consequently according to his bis position in order to makke make 0 out uta a case the prosecution would have to show shot that his conduct has been other than of that nature nothing can be clearer than the reasoning of judge powers upon the point af f plain injustice having been done to the defendant musser in allowing the impression to remain with the jury created by remarks of the prosecution to the effect that he had been instrumental in putting witnesses out of the way there had been no evidence that witnesses had been put out of the reach of the prosecution to say nothing of the fact that ri none hone had been adduced to connect the defendant with such a proceeding allowing the jury to inferentially obtain the implies lion sion slon that an attempt had bad been made to influence one of its members in behalf of the defendant the court failing to instruct the jury not to be affected unfavorably to him film by that incident was in keepin keeping tg with the same line lint of injustice in the case ofir Can cannon nori judge powers may have been legally ju jus s rifled in agreeing with the result ot of the trial triai while dissenting from a portion of the method by which it was attained it is claimed that the defect in the body of the proc proceeding ceding was not sufficient to change the outcome do not pretend to state that such a position is inadmissible in law but we do 6 hold that it is totally so in logic and mathematics and between law and d the exact sciences there should be but bul little littie it if any discrepancy it Is apparent from his honors hohols rutin ruling that he is of opinion that a plain right of the defendant in the course of the tile trial was denied him consequently the trial cannot from his standpoint be estimated a fair one every person accused pf af crime is entitled toa fair trial ther therefore e not havlu navin having had one of that charter that right should now be accorded him k |