Show WAS IT BUNCOMBE IN IV the vindictive harangue of judge zane when sentencing B Y hampton tor lor conspiring to expose aud and punish the lechers lechars whom ills honor r released eased from prosecution something new was enunciated in reference to proceedings against the fhe keepers of vile houses we we are always getting novelties in judicial affairs in utah judge zane said it is not ner necessary essary to prove specific acts to convict it of being a house of ill III fame or the keeper or others for tor f frequenting antim a it or any of the inmates of it we hope the police and others who are interested in the suppression of those haunts of sin will bear these instructions in mind if they have any value they can be brought to bear in quarters very close to the third district court and they will cause a shaking in circles which have be been unmoved by the exposures of the practices at the two houses now become notorious that certain parties who bacq figured bromine prominently antly in tile the persecution of the mormons cormons Mor mons have been habitual frequenters qu enters of other places known to be brothels can be proven by unimpeachable pea chable testimony let that testimony be produced let us see how much virtue there Is in the judges instructions let the deg degraded r abed fellows who hold their heads high in this city be known at their true value let the revelations of the road house come to light let the vituperative denouncers of the mor mons who have been watched night after night entering the dens of infamy in town be prosecuted on the principle laid down by judge zane I 1 it was only because it was thought that positive proof of specific acts was necessary to conviction that the interior detective business was inaugurated by mr air hampton but that is s rendered needless by the theory of the chief justice one thin thing connected with this however rend renders ers it a little dubious if the mere fact of their frequenting those vile haunts is sufficient lelent evidence 1 against mal mai male maie le prostitutes why Is it thau that t positive proofs by eye of specific acts are not received la in evidence if the lesser is sufficient lelent the greater must surely be acceptable but in the tile face of the anost direct dem of guilt judge zane dismissed the cases against pert persons ions lons convicted in the justices com court t the they were not only seen frequenting such such places as ane judae judge 0 e says iw rie wanis sup cup pressed but were detected in the very act of committing the most shameless debauchery ever prosecuted in a criminal court t when some of these creatures are sentenced by judge zane for the offense for detecting which mr hampton was sent to lail jail the public will have a higher opinion of his honors sincerity ana and ana and less occasion to buote quote the expressive word I 1 I 1 buncombe I 1 |