Show THE ZANE withdrawal there was an unusually large attendance of members of the bar at the session of the territorial supreme court january 29 brought out by anticipation of action on judge juddi zanes notice of withdrawal from the prosecution t io n of charges against F H dyer as receiver in the suit against the church at 1026 chief justice sandford and associate justices boreman henderson and judd came into the court room and after the opening judge judd proceeded to read the opinion of the majority of the court in the church suit relating to judge zanes withdrawal before ment mentioned ned As the closing part of the opinion was reached it created a sensation selsa tion in court of a nature that has never before been witnessed in connection with the proceedings ce the document is as aa follows in the supreme murt court of the territory of utah united states of america plaintiff vs the late corporation of the church of jesus christ of lat ter day saints and others defendants fend ants on the first day of december 1888 T C bailey rudolph alfr alff and J F millspaugh describing themselves to be trustees of the seventh and eighth school districts and secretary of the board of trustees of the twelfth school district brought before this court ape a petition in which they set out by description crip tion divers and sundry pieces of real real estate alleging that the same was waa the property of said late corporation they likewise alleged that on march 1888 april ath 1888 and may 1888 receiver dyer instituted I 1 actions in ne the third judicial district court of this territory rito against various defendants and rf in n the complaints in said suits among other things alleged that said last above described tracts of land were obtained and held by said late corporation in violation of section 3 8 of the act of july 1862 and not for the purposes of the worship of god or personages parsonages nages or burial grounds and that the claims of the various defendants in said suits were invalid and prayed that the deeds of said bald various defendants be held to be colorable and that the cloud upon the title created by such deeds be removed and that the possession of the said lands be adjudged to the said mid receiver for the uses and purposes mentioned in the sail section 3 of the act of march ad 1887 the petition then proceeds to state that afterwards on or about the ath day of july 1888 the said receiver and the defendants to the suits above named compromised said suits and in lieu of said tracts of land described in said complaint except a portion of lot 8 in block 76 that said receiver took the sum of or a note to stand in the place thereof and be treated and applied as the land should have been treated and applied that the solicitors of said corporation were the attorneys of said mid defendants except one in said compromises and there b by v a admitted that the e land had been obtained by the late corpora corporation tiou and was then held by the defendants for the late corporation in violation of said acts of congress and that the plaintiff was entitled to recover if said acts were valid and in effect admitted that the money received should be substituted for said lands and should be applied for the benefit of said common schools that the order of this court authorizing the said receiver to compromise said suits was made by the court as your petitioners petition ers are informed and believe solely upon the recommendations and representations of the receiver and his solicitors who stated to the court that the estimates in the petition for authority to compromise were the actual and reasonable values of said tracts under the circumstances and that said compromises were fair and reasonable your petitioners petition ers charge however that said tracts of land were worth and that 84 15 was a grossly inadequate valuation of said property that no evidence was heard by the court in regard to said compromise and your petitioners petition ers believe that the court was misled by the said representations and recommendations of the receiver and his solicitors that the said order of the court required the receiver to report said compromise to the court for its approval roval and that such report has not t been een made the petition then proceeds to allege that the compromises should be set aside but if they are allowed to stand then the money or notes or other evidences of indebtedness or the proceeds thereof taken for or in lieu of said land must be applied as the land and the proceeds thereof was required to be the petition further alleges that the said receiver now has in his possession the sum of received in compromise for cattle and other property that said property as petitioners petition ers are informed and believe was worth at the time 2601 that it was estimated by parties to this suit in a stipulation of facts made october 1887 to be worth the sum of and that this transaction between the receiver and defendant corporation was made without authority from this court and further farther that since the appointment of said receiver he has obtained possession of sheep the property of the defendant corporation and after receiving the same he rented them without any authority of the court and without public notice t to one W L pickard a surety upon said receivers receive rIs bowd bond at the rate of 20 cents per head per annum when the customary price was from 40 to 50 cents per head bead and that in such renting of said sheep the fund sustained a loss of about the petition further farther alleges as aa petitioners petition ers are informed and believe that there is property to a large amount of which said receiver has not taken possession that was owned by said defendant corporation and was in the possession of its agents or of others for said corporation after said receiver qualified and that he could have taken and obtained possession of said property by the use of reasonable diligence as receiver and that his failure to do so was from want of attention to his duties as receiver or from wilful negligence or through combination with agents of the late corporation the petition further alleges that th the e receiver after he had entered upon his duties as such retained one P L williams who was and is territorial commissioner of schools and one george S peters who was and is the attorney for the united states in this territory as his hie attorneys and solicitors that the said receiver was at the time of his ap ad and is now united states sta marshal for said territory that as receiver he presented a claim for allowance to him for clerk hire compensation pensa tion to solicitors agents and employed emp loyes for office rent stationery and other expenses amounting to the sum of that not having yet been made parties to this proceeding or granted leave to appear therein your petitioners petition ers have not examined said report of expenses of the receiver sufficiently to point objections thereto that such an examination would involve a scrutiny of vouchers and probably an examination of witnesses but that if permitted by the cou court to do so your petitioners petition ers as they are informed and believe can point out well founded objections to said account the petition further states that the receiver has presented a claim for allowance to himself for his individual services as receiver of and in addition each of his solicitors presented a claim for said claims aggregating 52 that said claims for allowances were referred to the examiner in this case to take testimony as to the amount to be allowed t that at the united states attorney for utah and the territorial commissioner of schools both appeared for the receiver in the taking of such testimony and no one appeared for the united states or for the said common schools that on such examination the defendant corporation at first appeared by its solicitors sheeks rawlins and by them the first witnesses produced by b the receiver were cross examined elaml but afterwards as petitioners petition ers are informed and believe they were instructed ted by the defendants not to cross examine and not to contest the clat claims ms of the receiver or of his solicitors liel lielnors ors tors and thereupon they ceased to make any further contest and the examination became and was wholly an ex parle examination by the receiver and his solicitors before said referee the petition then proceeds to allege that under the law george S peters as united states district attorney was bound to appear by virtue of his office for the united states in all suits in which the united states was a party and that he was not entitled to have or receive any sum for any services he be may have performed as solicitor for the receiver in this case and that the claim of the said WW liams as solicitor for said add receiver for was much too large the petition then proceeds in so many words to charge as aa follows your petitioners petition ers further farther represent that the amount claimed by the said receiver for his individual services is grossly exorbitant excessive and unconscionable that the allowance to the receiver for his se services jr must be only for those rendered by himself and he cannot be allowed for services for which his agents and employed emp loyes may be allowed and paid rid tb the e pe petition ti 0 on further states that the difference between the amount for which the sheep above mentioned could have been rented and the amount for which they were rented is about and that this amount should be deducted from said receivers compensation if in view of his breach of duty he is deemed entitled to any compensation pensa tion and if it be that he so rented said sheep in return for any benefit to himself or the hope thereof then he ought not to receive any compensation and said contract of renting should be disapproved and the receiver held for all loss to the fund in consequence of such wrongful renting the petition further states that petitioners petition ers are informed and believe that the sum of above mentioned received from the said defendant in compromise for certain property above mentioned was a gross sly inadequate consi derso tion and the receiver should be hew held to account to the fund for the difference between and a fair consideration for said property and such difference your petitioners petition 1 loners ers believe is not less than or that said transaction should be disapproved by the court and the receiver held to a strict accountability ao count ability for all loss in consequence of his wrongful action and adv further farther that the receiver should bo be held accountable for the loss to the fund and to the common schools caused by the compromise upon tb the real estate above mentioned and this low loss your petitioners petition ers charge information and belief is not less than and that further tf if said receiver be allowed any com sensation pensa tion at this time it should not rn tn any view exceed the petition then proceeds to charge that inasmuch as no one on has appeared on behalf of the common schools that the fund is likely to be greatly diminished by said claims claim made against it and that the appearance of some one for the th common schools is rendered absolutely necessary to the ends of justice and the fact that the COM missioner of common schools of 0 this territory is em employed I 1 0 by said receiver against the interests f o of said schools and that the united states attorney forth for this Is territory 18 also em aloyed against the common schools and that the receiver himself is an officer of the united states and nd that they are claiming that by ft A compromise the said schools have already been deprived of a harfe ate portion of the proceeds of said lands and that those proceeds have boemo the of the united states Z ah xh old monal reasons for permitting the trustees of district schools to appear in this proceeding wherefore the petitioners petition ers pray 88 48 follows that they may be made parties ies to such proceedings or that lev 7 may be oe allowed to appear by their solicitor or otherwise in order to defend and protect the interests of the common schools they represent and preserve so much of the fund as may mong ong to said schools and that such other ether trustees trustee i of district strict ii schools as may wish to come in 3 may also be made parties or allowed to appear and that your petitioners petition ers may be allowed to produce evidence to prove and substantiate the facts stated in this petition and that petitioners petition ers may have such other and lurther luef as to equity belongs and as to this th court may appear to be equitable signed and sworn to by T C awley alley chairman board of trustees truse truee e seventh school district rudolph dolph h alff chairman board of trustees ru eighth school district J v P millspaugh secretary board of trustees twelfth school district upon the application of the solicitors of said petitioners petition ers to be allowed to file said petition in said above entitled cause to become pax parties ties thereto to this court filed an opi opinion 19 0 written aten by henderson Hen deison judge I 1 in substance stance as follows this is an application of certain hool trustees to be allowed to intervene alae as parties to the case we are of the opinion that petitioners petition ers do ot lot show by their petition any ht to intervene as parties there 18 w nothing thing to show that the government is not disposed to look after the interests of the fund and the inter eats of petitioners petition ers as school trustees w aft too remote to be recognized by an M order allowing them to inter verle e but the petition which has huegi A read contains charges of a 9 grave and serious nature the receiver and his actor ys george S peters and diey aley i ii williams the charge has as been directly made that the ret celver has acted corruptly and in 04 MIna collusion with the defend waw and that this court has been imposed upon by the representations of the receiver and his said actor asi and a fraud thereby accod VU gushed lied if this be true a crime has ell n committed and this court can vw and will not pass it by without wit ou ration as the action of these th e boffl 0 vvs M charged with a delicate and ficula difficult fi cult duty should be met by re sible accusers and have the op te cullity to confront them either u receiver and his attorneys have ba Q guilty of a crime or some per or interested in egl persons are ly accusing them this petition 1 b apon X being verified a and nd endorsed some ome persons res responsible fusible for the bots nots be i 88 which may be incurred nou should received 4 and d filed as charges rost the receiver and said actor ny lie 71 sj and they should each be fad to file their respective an awers of thereto so far as the charges ai fraud and th conduct are charged against mrm i and upon the 8 of their thedr answers it should stand referred to an examiner to take such testimony as is offered both to sustain and disprove the charges contained in the petition and report the same to this court on or before the next regular term of tills this court if the charges of corruption and improper conduct are sustained and the fund in controversy in this case thereby preserved and protected provisions can hereafter be made for the payment of the expenses in incurred but in the meantime we shall postpone the question of compensation pensa tion to the receiver and attorneys cleys until the bringing in of the report we have only had a few hours to consider this matter and therefore have not had time to state more in detail our reasons for this action an order should be entered conformable to this opinion answers were filed by the said dyer and his solicitors in due time denying au all said charges in full when this opinion was rendered by the court it was distinctly stated to the |