OCR Text |
Show MARSHALL ORDERS CRIMINAL ACTION Salt Lake, July !. Mandatory directions di-rections were given (by Judge John A. Marshall of tho United Slates district dis-trict court to District Attorncv H. E. Uooth yesterday morning directing him to proparo an information charging charg-ing criminal contempt against George Ei. Hale, secretary and general miuin gcr of the Herald-Ropnhllcan; Arthur J. Brown, managing editor, and Prod Bagby, city editor, of tho publication. This action grows out of an affidavit affida-vit filed May I) by Thomas Kearns, In which It was charged Uiat certnln articles ar-ticles published by tho Herald-Repuo-llcan on the dates May 4, 5 and b, were In contempt in that thoy woro calculated to lnflueuco tho jury then engaged In hearing tho caso of Frank , I. Sofrlt against the Salt Lako Telegram Tele-gram Publishing company, of which Thomas Kearns and David Keith arc tho principal owners. Judge Marshall on May 10 signed the order for tho three members of tho Herald-Republican staff to appear on Juno 12 and showi cause why they should not b adjudged in contempt o court. The hearing was at tho latter lat-ter date continued until July 3. by reason' of the ahseoce of Judge Mar- phall from the city, and the matlor was yesterday brought before the court at the morning session. J. W N. Whltecotlon of Provo appeared ap-peared for tho defendants and presented pre-sented a demurrer, In which It was b'et mit that the facts stated In thq affidavit did not prosonl a causo of action upon which a claim of contempt, might be bused At great length Mr. Whltecotlon argued that thero was nothing In tho affidavit which could be construed ns placing tho pnrtlcs in contempt of court, and hold that no statement published could ho considered consider-ed nn an act of misbehavior calculated to Interfere with the administration of Justice Ho also contended thai the affidait wbr under tho title of a civil action, and that if thore was any contempt It must of necessity ho criminal, not based upon tho ground of any claim for damages, and that in such ense tho defondauts would bo on-titled on-titled to proceed undbr the rules of criminal action. Judge Marshall announced that ho had decided opinions with reference to the publication In a circulated newspaper, of comments which might I tend to influenco tho verdict ot tho jury, and which could be construel ' as contempt of court. Ho said that the only question to o doclded was the one as to whether or not the charge of criminal contempt was prop-orh prop-orh made when the affidavit was under un-der the title of a civil action. Judgo O. W. Powers, who appeared for the complainant, argued briefly that whllo the title was under that of the former civil action the whole intent and purpose of tho affidavit was to charge a criminal contempt of court, and asserted that there was no purpose on the part of tho affiant to seek or to recover damages. Judge Marshall then announced his decision, discharging tho order as on-tilled on-tilled under tho civil case and directing direct-ing the district attorney to proparo an Information charging Brown, Hale and Bagby with criminal contempt. In giving this decision. Judge Marshall Mar-shall polntod out that the publication ot articles containing comment, while a caso was In progress, In a paper which might fall Into tho hands of the Jurors was as much contempt of court nud an obstruction to tho administration ad-ministration of Justice as if the purors had "boen solicited by word of mouth regarding their verdict. District Attorney Booth stated to tho court that ho was a stockholder In tho IIorald-Republlcan and was Informed In-formed by Judge Marshall that one of his assistants could prepare tho In formation nad prosecute the case. |