| Show AFFIDAVIT territory 0 ry ot utah 1 s salt lake county I 1 be it remembered that on this the ad day of january 1872 personally appeared charles W baker who was by me sworn in due form of law lav and who on his oath iid ild lid did say that he is the identical charles W baker who was a witness in an examination before the honorable james B mckean chief judge of tile the supreme court bourt of the territory of utah coul coni commencing on the day of be december cember and terminating on the az id day of december 1871 at salt Lake City wherein john L lilythe LB lythe blythe james toms alexander burt bre and ana brigham Y hampton were charged with the murder ofa of J king robinson at salt lake city in the county of salt lake and territory of utah on the day of october 1866 ile he further says that the testimony which he then on said examination gave was wholly untrue and false ile he lurther says he was hired to give said testimony by S gilson that it was agreed between him and the said sald S gilson and others that he was to be paid the sum of five hundred dollars no matter what might be the event of oi the proceedings and one thousand dollars for each person that was or might be convicted that during the time he was enoa enga engaged ed in said testimony and detain detained ego eTo his bis board was paid by said guson gilson and others at the revere house in said city ile he further says that he had a plat of the ground and of the street in the city of ground salt sait at lake near to the place where the murder was committed furnished nim by S gilson gison I 1 which plat piat before he gave evidence was by him carefully studied so that he inight might understand it ile he further says that since he so iso gave his testimony he has carefully reflected on the enormity of the crime he has committed and Is aiding alding in carrying 0 out u t and has concluded to make ulak 0 amends as fan far ar as it Is iq now in 19 pmj hia hla pow power 0 r he therefore voluntarily now makes this statement upon his oath he fie f furtner further says that on or about the day of december 1871 he had a conversation with thomas butterwood who then informed this affiant that he was hired to give his testimony in the above named case and that nis his testimony was not true signed C W BAKER subscribed and sworn to before me this third day daj of january A D 1872 JOHN jonn T CAINE notary public TERRITORY OF UTAH county of SaIt salt lake I 1 ss this certifies that I 1 have careful carefully 1 compared the above copy of affidavit of C W baker with the original as sworn to before me on the ard ard 3rd day of january 1872 and find the same to be a true copy in every particular As witness my hand and notarial seat this oth day of january anu r 1872 JOHN T CAI cal CAINE calne N 1 notary public Atthe at the time of the ilic INIc mckean Kean raid a large number of indictments were e found a against I 1 ainest mormons cormons Mor Alor mons by the grand juries prepared for the purpose besides those based on trumped up charges of murder on which the accused were committed without bail ball ba 11 many were held on charges of lascivious cohabitation under the territorial statute which then existed but was suase subsequently bent repealed the law was never I 1 intended nten ed for polygamy cases but it suited the purposes of or the crusaders crusaders to ignore the U S law of 1862 1802 and pursue the mormons cormons Mor mons under a local statute that had bad no legal applicability in the premises on the of bf january 1872 when affairs had bad assumed a gloomy aspect the clouds were cleared away by th famous beels decision ion lon of the U S court which declared mckeand Mc heans Keans method of packing juries illegal the dispatch announcing the ruling said speaking of its purport th the jury which tried the case was not selected in conformity with law and it follows that the indictments against mormons cormons are illegal and all proceedings proceeds edl edi had against them hem must fall to the ground the open venire jury method for anti mormon crusading purposes is not in view of an express united states statute defining the proper mode more legal in any aspect than the extrajudicial extra judic judicial lai ial lal system adopted by I 1 mckean for the same object it will be hoped by all lovers of law and justice that when the tile question of legality is brought squarely before the united states supreme court it irwill will be consigned to a similar fate this thi swiller will certainly be the result unless indeed the last bulwark of liberty and justice has a rotten spot in it if there is any doublin doubt in the mind of any intelligent justice loving individual regarding the true inwardness of the present anti mormon e crusade let him look at the character of the means employed to further its ends it will harmonize with its fatute precisely |
