Show B Y TRIAL tt I 1 HOW IKEI and ANU PACKED JURY 51 NO 0 mori MOni IONS lons 1 1 after the of the grand juiyin the third district court this th ii morning the case of the people ys B Y Ha hampton hanpton apton charged with conspiracy 71 w with ith mrs fields to entice th thes thet emoral moral F 0 H s from the paths of virtue 91 was taken up judge hoe hope interposed d the following challenge to the panel ot of jurors said defendant hereby challenges challenged the panel of jurors now here returned into this thia court for the trial of this case before any juror herein Is sworn and for cause of 0 challenge avers i that bald raid jurors were selected summoned and returned solely by bk E A Ire lre ireland laDd land as united states stites marshal for the territory of utah pursuant to a special open venire issued out of and returned to this court on the day of december A D 1885 and not otherwise tb that at atthe at the time tim e of selecting and summoning said jurors and each of theland the hem Mand and prior thereto said E A ireland was biased and prejudiced against this defendant an and had formed and expressed an unqualified opinion that vae tae defendant was guilty or ot thep the charge harge which said jurors were summoned to try and that he has intentionally ally omitted to summon any person parson as a juror who is a member of the mormon church for the tho reason that the defendant was and is known to him to be a member of said church and intentionally selected persons as jurors whom he believed would be diore faNN favorable rable rabie to the prosecution tha than n to the defense in this action pl mr varian for the prosecution excepted ce ted to the challenge phe the the court promptly overruled the challenge and nir air sheeks stated that if the facts alleged were admitted the defense would take an exception and pass it not they wished to introduce evidence to show that the allegations were true wile mr varian varlan read from the law providing that the thel court acourt should hear and determine the question and stated that the legal jury under the statute had been aih exhausted austed and the proceedings were now under the common law ohp ohp court withdrew tho the overruling of fhe the cha chali denge benge denge ringe and the arguments were proceeded with mr sheeks sheek contended that under the common law a challenge on the ground of bias blas 4 against the defendant on the part of the officer selecting the jury was good at a former term of this court another open venire had been issued rind and had been served by tho the tame same s officer under the same circumstances it was wag waa well known fact that the over majority of those eligible for jury duty were mormons cormons Mor mons and the officer in selecting non mormons cormons had bad shown himself wiser than the law llis ills action had no appears appearance nce nee of fairness in view of the feelings g well known to exist in the community ty the dol del defendant jdant could not have a fair trial before such a jury mr varian replied at some length arguing that many want ot the reasons e ea asting at common law requiring impartiality tia lity Y did not exist at the present time as us defendants had more liberal privileges and unless jurors violated their oaths oatha the jury could be purged formerly the officer was required to be impartial but now nov the deion defon defendant dant daut had a different means of relief the prejudice of the officer should not be held helf as a ground of challenge the marshal might by corruption change the complexion of the jury yet it did not afford a cause calise of challenge the defendant had no right tight to be tried by members of the mormon church whether t the bd T marshai marshal diar Alar shat shau was or was not poeju diecha nothing to do with the case hearted he acted under his oath of of office the charge that the marshal selected persons whom he e believed would be more favorable to the prosecution than to the defense warnot not nod a ground of general challe chalie challenge lige lize judge hoge contended that the question ues aes pt issue was whether the he charge charge against the marshal was sufficiently s cinc in claiming that that officer e had acted so as to deprive the defendant of his right to a trial by an I 1 impartial ar jury the very authority cita cited by Y the prosecution sustained the position of the e defense if the marshal selected men who were favorable totne to the prosecution it would be manifestly unfair to try a man before suca a jury the defense iid ild did lid not cia cla claim in the right ight to a trial bj bv mormons cormons Mor IVor mons but they did claim A u right to an impartial tury lury and not i v i t non nou mormon n 11 3 1 jury ur specially really ivied instead of bei bel being n c chosed 0 seil seti from twoie eted c eligible Irre irne irrespective spec tle tie of I 1 rel rei religious igloos belief if the jurors had bad all neen been mormons cormons Mor mons the prosecution would not have accepted them under the present presed conditions the court rufed that the challenge challene to the list of jurors relying on oa thie the grounds named ie e the blas bias jagd aid aad prel udice of E A ireland mars marshal marshai a did not 0 specially p e 0 11 y r relate elate to the present list of j jurors u as s t the b na names r a es had bad not been me selected rio tio e rs for tor orthis this special 1 ial tal case but for the term the intention of the thu lav law was to provide an impartial ti aljury j ury nry the clerk of the district court and ania probate judge ludge were designated to select the jurors perhaps because it was thought the partiality of the one would welza weigh against that of the other this jury had bad been selected by the marshal and the law contemplated that he should act impartially the questions as to whether or not the jurors belonged to any church was not a question there was one material fact stated charging the marshal with selecting select ins los jurors whom he believed favor favorable abr e to the prosecution and if it he be had done so the jury should be withdrawn the fact that he had a belief la in the guilt or innocence of the der de r fondant cut opt no figure dinue in he case ohp the challenge was overruled except as to the charge that the marshal was guilty of impartiality mr ir varian vannan denied the challenge in that particular for the prosecution marshal ireland was wa called as a witness by the defendant relative to ehe the ground of challenge ile he te testified stifled that as U S marshal he thad charge of serving the open venire he understood the defendant was to bo be tried at this term had named some of the jurors selected ed thought he acted impartially in the t he matter mr sheeks shocks asked whether the marshal knew that all the jurors were not members of the mormon church of which defendant was a member this was objected to by moe toe prosecution and the objection was sustained i witness ireland had no feelings against the defendant talked with the witnesses in the case had no bias therein did not select men particularly because he thought they would convict cou con vict had summoned the jury on open venire at last term mr sheeks did you not select men mp whom tou you knew were opposed to mr Hamp hamptlon tion politically and religiously objected to boand and objection sustained marshal ireland said he did not select men whom he thought would be favorable to the pro elution he never asked a man what church he belonged belong ed to his alm aim was to get competent men it had entered into his mind that the men selected belonged to the ahe anti mormon element 1 I aimed not to select members ot of that particular faith because I 1 do not think they would be impartial jurors hd thought the others would w 0 uld nid be fair to both sides according accor ling to the evidence f did not consider they would have auy any inclination against the defendant 1 t I omitted to select I 1 mormons cormons Mor mons because I 1 thought they would n not ot be impartial although they are in the majority I 1 know none who arc competent jurors in this case this was done because t the h e defendant n dant daut belonged to that class had formerly selected a jury for this case and followed the same rule for the same bame reason had not talked with any of the jurors or heard them express r ess es an ail opinion that he be remembered 9 e red captain greenman assisted to make up tip the list he thought the mormon Mor mons s 11 as a rule were we ot good jurors did not do this because he wanted to see the defendant convicted convict edt he had an opinion on the subject and had talked with one or more of OF the witnesses cross examined by mr mf varlan vallan witness had given the matter considerable thought that he might select men who had not expressed an 0 opinion I 1 in had not talked with any of leg lem them subsequent sequent to their thel names rames being placed on the list lis tinor nor did he kemem remember bei any I 1 former ormer conversation his deputies made the service by mr air sheeks had an view principally this case when the selection was made it if a man was loud in talking of the case be he would leave his name off the challenge was submitted and was promptly overruled by the court tze tee the jury were then called as follows folls S C ewing chas W watson T J almy J P keats jas glendenning geo sellis isaac hazelgrove A C brixen fulton haight chas W ly mcqueen and J 31 darling judge hoge examined the jurors for the defense SC ewing had heard and read of the case and had formed an au opinion did not know whether or not it was i unqualified not understanding the term it would take testimony to remove that opinion challenged by the defense to mr Varian vannan Had read the newspapers knew nothing of the facts outside of that his opinion depended on the truth of what he had read if sworn as a juror he would decide according to the evidence without having baying been prejudiced or hyped by what he had read would put aside aalde what he read Inthe in the papers challenge denied 1 by the prosecution to judge nogo hogo had formed an opinion which it would take test remove and would go into the jury box with that impression impress impresa ion lon on his mind I 1 to the bourt court had not talked with any of the witnesses out heard what was common rumor to judge hoge the papers pape rs had stated what wha t purported to be the facts and these facts were discussed knew of no reason why he did not believe those facts thought the evidence was against mr nin ilai 1121 hampton apton had bad no personal bias against the defendant was biased in favor of the prosecution in this case to the court had based his opinion ou on what he read and heard ho he would be governed by the evidence and his 0 opinion P would not influence his verdict i the court overruled the objection and the defense took kookan an exception chas W watson of bingham had heard and read of what purported to be the facts had formed an opinion which it would evidence to remove challenged to mr air varian varlan had only gathered the tho facts from the newspapers his bis opinion was qualified would try the case on the evidence challenge denied to mr sir sheeks believed whit what h he read to be true and had expressed an ark an opinion opi nien without without qualification the court sustained the challenge and thud thed the thy Juror uror was waa excused the court ourt then took recess until 2 pm 1 0 this afternoon the work of Securing a jury was continued T J aimy almy had haa formed and expressed an opinion which it would take evidence tote tore to remove he was challenged chal chai by the defense the challenge was denied by the prosecution and was overruled and the juror was way accepted the defense excepted james P keats and james glenden ning had not expressed an opinion and were passed george S ellis eins had expressed an lopno opinion n was challenged an and the challenge r refused the juror was accepted L cep ted isaac hazelgrove had heard beard and read of the case also read the grand jury report and dir air MrVa carians Va rians speech in this class of cases had expressed an opinion had no bias it would take evidence to remove his opinion read and bell beil believed eyed the prosecuting attorneys speech in the court in these cases challenged challenge denied and oyer rule ruled dand and the juror juro r was ivas accepted d A 6 C brixen h had d heard and read of the case but had not formed or expressed an opinion had no bias or prejudice passed fulton haight had formed and ex est pressed a qualified opinion had no bias passed C W lynian had formed and expressed an opinion it would take evidence to remove his opinion could not say whether or not he was biased did not think he was passed Wm mcqueen had read and talked of the case but had ino ina no opinion about it was biased and prejudiced did not think he would make a competent juror excused t J M darling had he ardol heard oj the case and had formed and express expressed eda a qualified opinion had read the prosecuting attorneys statement and bc ba i lieveld a portion of it had no biag blag blasini int tho thomase case passed 1 1 james glendenning and SC mcewing ewing were peremptorily excused by the dc de tense this left eight jurors who were sworn I 1 J JL J Durgin samuel paul 11 II W Law lawrence rence ronce and julius malsh were called sailed J L durgin had heard and read of the ca seana seand had formed and expressed an unqualified opinion was biased and prejudiced inthe in the case challenged t and excused samuel paul had formed a qualified opinion was not biased in the case passed H W lawrence had formed and ex pressed an lopint m n which it would take evidence to remove had no prejudice against the defendant challenged challenge denied and over ruled and the I 1 juron juror dror accepted julius juilus malsh maish had formed and expressed an unqualified opinion loA ioa challenged and excused liw HW lawrence was peremptorily excused and samuel paul was sworn john J duke C A dahl dahi and T E harper were all passed and sworn completing the panel mr varian then began bexan his opening address to tb the a jury i careless nurses have let chil chii children dyen dien fall and injured them for fon life ilfe T they have also given them doses of cou cough vh mixtures containing opiates with fatal ra results there is no danger in red bed star cough cure free from narcotics only 25 cents prompt safe cafe sure why experiment with expensive e 4 drugs when a bottle of st jacobs oil oli costing only nifty fifty cents will cure your jour rheumatism neuralgia or lumbago echo answers why M wr fail to express my gratl lil tit li so sa 6 mr selby carter of nash vile tenn for the benefits derived from ayers sarsaparilla having been afflicted all my life with scrofula my system seemed saturated with it it IV came out in blotches blotcher blot ches ulcers and mat tery sores all over my my body mr mrk carter states that he was entire entirely lk cured by ayers sarsaparilla ana and since bince discontinuing its use eight elyot months ago has had no return of the scrofulous symptoms browns bronchial 1 doches arc excellent for the relief of hoarseness or sore sord throat they are exceedingly effective christian world lomona F ilg 1 l the Kallio dont bracket patented Is for sale by Z C M 1 I SALVE the BEST kalve SALVE alve la in the world for C cut ftp bruises sores ulcers salt R rheum heum fever sorell sore tetter chapped 11 hands ands chilblains corns and anc all skin eruptions and positively cures plies piles 0 or no pay required it is guaranteed to give perfect satisfaction or money refunded price 25 cents per box FOR SALE 4 AT T Z C G M 1 I DRUG STORE |