| Show OFFICIAL SLANDER AND abuisi THE case of alonzo E hyde before commissioner mckay on friday developed a little more of the spirit in which prosecutions under the edmunds act are conducted there was absolutely nothing adduced in evidence that went to show in the remotest manner that the accused had violated the law district attorney dickson becoming enraged at his fa failure ilare attacked and abused his own witnesses c charging h arg ing them with perjury because they did not rive give the testimony he desired and expected he then demanded that the defendant be held not on tile the ground that the evidence justified his bis detention but bat on the plea that the witnesses in the prosecution were perjured 1 was ver ever such an argument made by a sane person before in a court of justice justice is tae term we have used but the word is entirely out of place in the court of mckay that mercenary off official leial said he was not golno going to lose jurisdiction of this case and so adjourned it announcing that he should do so from time to time as far as the statute allowed this too after the ease case was closed and submitted there was absolutely nothing to hold the de fondant fen dant yet he would continue the case ah and hold bold him anyhow lor for he be propose to let go his bis grip white while there was a cent to be made out of it fees are his god and for these he lives U res and moves and has his bis little be ne e understand that mr F S richards in a gentlemanly but scathing vanner manner too took ik the prosecutor to task for jis abuse of tue the witnesses and showed the absurdity of the logic that required the holding of the accused for unlawful cohabitation solely because the witnesses tor for the prosecution were alleged to have committed committe d perjury per jary mr hyde too had something to say on the latter proposition which demonstrated its utter folly and an a puerility i what was the terrible perjury of the witnesses jos jasp this mrs wilcox stated that her daughter had left tome home three or four years ago her son testified that his sister last left home about eight months ao ago where is the contradiction it was explained by mr richards that the lovig woman left lef t home at the time her j mother stated but had visited there j occasionally several times the last visit being elgia months ago Nei neither therl mrs mra wilcox nor her son knew whether the tae girl was married but the mot mother lier presumed she was what right on these grounds had mr dickson to charge these his own witnesses with crime we say hs he had no right whatever v e and that he knows he had not lie stands guilty of public slander it if he had made the same accusations out of court he could have been prosecuted for defamation of character he was protected pr ec d by y his is position and took advantage ad abage of it to vent his rage ra e upon a lady and a a young man who were W powerless 0 aless to resist his false and malicious in lei s ebullitions ebu irions of baffled rage 1 Is it not brave and manly and ge gentlemanly n tle manly and praiseworthy to hide behind the cover of a court and f fulminate ua nil base and untruthful charges against a woman who has no opportunity to defend herself mr Dick soni i moat be proud of his self exposure it is so dignified and professional and honorable to call a lady vile names in court that he would not dare to utter on the street if even a fifteen years old boy were present to defend his mother from abuse and the logic of his splenetic argument 1 Is overwhelming A defend 1 ant must be guilty because the witnesses for the prosecution would not give any evidence against him I 1 irresistible and conclusive is it not kickay bekay wanted the defendant togo on the stand and swear that he had not married the girl said to be his plural wife A modest demand truly one that we should expect from such a a man as mckay but no other individual under the sun sitting in the capacity of a magistrate we would like to know on what authority this apology for a judicial officer compels witnesses who do not know anything of an alleged fact to testify under oath ass as to what they think or be beeve CHeve we would like to see this stretch of authority tested and consider that any adv witness would be perfectly j justified I 1 im at law jaw as in common sense in I 1 n refusing to respond to questions as to opinion or belief and it is about time that this common cowardly vile and lying charge of perjury against people who will not swear to a thing they know nothing about was stopped if the prosecuting attorney considers one of his witnesses is perjured let him proceed lawfully against the witness but if the he cannot or will not do that I 1 let hift learn to be half decent to control L his temper and to ab abstain from publicly slandering ladies and gentlemen who are unfortunate enough to be compelled to endure his presence for a short time in court any judge or Magl magistrate istrate who has ordinary self J respect and regard for propriety and I 1 the protection of witnesses would severely I 1 vere y rebuke uke and put a peremptory stop atop to such lich exhibitions as were indulged in by district attorney dickson la in the commissioners presence on friday |
