OCR Text |
Show I, MAYOR REBUKED BY JUDGE OF MUNICIPAL COURT IN A -STATEMENT ON PROUTY CASE B Mayor A. R. Heywood and Commls- H ' sloner M. L. Jones "started something" j when they reduced IT. It. Prouty's B sentence for bootlegging from six Hl months in jail to a $200 fine. Prouty H is manager of the Weber hotel and H waB convicted of bootlegging by a B jury verdict. H Judge George S. Barker, of the B municipal court, sentenced Prouty H after listening to evidence by Sergt. H O. H. Mohlman and others who made H the arrest and upon which evidence H the jury returned its verdict. The H judge thought the punishment fit the H crime. In an interview given to the 1 Standard today. Judge Barker de- H clares the commissioners usurped a Hj power which legally belongs, to the H Judge Barker's statement is as fol- H Judge Barker's Statement. B "In view of the well-nigh universal H disapproval voiced by the citizens of - the community in regard to the action H of the board of city commissioners in B the matter of the city of Ogden versus B H. R. Prouty, recently tried and found B guilty by a jury in the municipal court, and sentenced by myself to 1 serve a period or six months in the B city jail, and that my attitude in tne B 1 matter may be clearly understood, and B the responsibility for the setting aside B of the judgment of tho court and the ' assessing of a penalty of $200 may be B I placed where it properly belongs, I B j feel constrained to make a brief statc- B j ment, explaining my position in the B premises. B "In the first place, I was absolutely B ignorant of the fact, and had no intl- B mation that the matter was to be con- B i sldered by the board of city commis- B. ' sioners, until the result of its action B' was announced through the columns B , of the daily papers. Ordinarily, when B cases are presented for executive B clemency, the trial judge is consulted B regarding the merits of the case and B his recommendations taken into con-B con-B -v sideration in disposing of the matter, bit in. this instance, for some reason best known to the board, this courtesy was not extended. "I am well aware of the fact that the law provides that' 'the board of com -missioners is authorized and em-l em-l powered to grant full pardons to per- sons convicted of violations of the (city) ordinance,' and to remit so much of any fine or penalty Imposed r J as in 'its judgment may seem just and reasonable.' Had the action of the board been confined to the powers herein conferred, mat Is, to .the grant-jug grant-jug of either a full pardon or of re-mitting re-mitting a part of the penaty of im-H. im-H. prisonment (and that is as far as it could go, as no fine was assessed by the court, hence there was no fine to remit), its action would have been lawful; but in the Prouty case, after exercising the pardoning power con-ferred con-ferred by la"v, the board then pi'o- ceeded to usurp a purely judicial tunc- lion and sentenced the defendant to pay a fine of $200. In my judgment, to this extent, the action ot the board of fl city commissioners is an unwarranted usurpation of authority, and not war-ranted war-ranted by law. Furthermore, in this ' case the defendant, through his attor-B attor-B ney,had filed in the municipal court his notice of appeal to the district court, and had posted his cash appeal bond in the sum of $300. In view of the avowed policy of the municipal . court with reference to violations of the liquor law, and the further fact that the defendant had appealed his case tota higher tribunal where his ca,se would have been tried de novo and to a jury, and thus his constitu-tional constitu-tional rights fully protected, it appears to me that the action of tne commis-sion commis-sion is a direct affront to the munici-pa munici-pa court, and a reflection upon our whole judicial system. "In my capacity as judge of the fl municipal court, it has been my policy to pursue a consistent and effective course in the enforcement of the law, especially -with reference to matters affecting the. moral welfare of the Hl community. With reference to the illicit ariffic in liquor, I think I know -what the sentiment of the community is. Public sentiment demands, and the mr people have a right to expect,- a rigid enforcement of the law with respect j to this vitally important matter. They want no weak, vacillating policy, but f ips onehat will be effective and bring r 1 Ib-abmithlBsjred result a dry Utah. "In the Pjouty case, I still feel that I did my dutvtalthough an unpleasant vone. The responsibility as the case now stands, miit rest with Mayor Hey wood and Commissioner Jones. I-understand I-understand Commissioner Flygare was absent and took no. part in the proceedings." pro-ceedings." Supplementing Judge Barker's statement, rather reinforcing it, the Ministerial association has takea 'a hand in the matter; County Attorney Charles Fan has indicated his willing-nes willing-nes to prosecute a state action against Prouty, and Scrgt. Mohlman ias declared that the polico department depart-ment has not finished with the matter. Tho Ministerial association will meet at 11 o'clock tomorrow morning and take definite action. It is probable Rev. Christian R. Carver, secretary, will be instructed to sign a complaint to be prosecuted by County Attorney Farr in the state courts. Mayor Hcywood stated this morning morn-ing that he had nothing to say relative rela-tive to the matter, but that he probably prob-ably would have a statement to make after reading Judge Barker's interview. He did not intimate whether he would seek to Justify the ruling as a matter of law, or whether he would stand on the suggestion of the city attorney (who did not appear in the trial of the case), that the sentence be reduced, or whether he would take- the flat stand that six months in jail is "too high a sentence for a first offense." oo |