Show K f y FIRST DISTRICT COURT may tennas V 11 if ir En enderson terson associate joist justice FRIDAY may oth 1884 people vs E L D bianconi for burglary at bear river city box elder county prisoner arraigned and given 24 hours time to plead clead mr heywood appointed as his is counsel people vs wm bean for obtaining frota peter johnson 20 under false pretenses at weber county prisoner arraigned plea not guilty people vs Ys charles houman hoffman obtaining from joseph morley at five dollars under false pretenses prisoner arra arraigned ign plea not guilty when asked if he lie had bad counsel he be replied that lie had bad no friends nor money tho the court smilingly remarked mr barratt that just the man you arc are after yie the audience lati laughed 0 olied buehr but mr barratt did not seem to ap appreciate the joke still he be acted the bood good samaritan and de banded Bub subpoenas pomas for witnesses at the public expense people vs W it southard grand larceny at weber county of 59 the property of john kuhn prisoner arraigned plea not ailcy court assigned mr A B tay taylor or to defend him aple vs clevi sL Levi evi campbell grand larceny case called no response bonds declared for cited cd temple shorland short Shor tand and oscar short being the bondsmen came out short in tho the present investment but they will probably be long in remembering it idleman bros v Wool ncr no response default entered people vs levi campbell Gam grand larceny caso no 2 caso case called bonds forfeited temple and oscar Shori erstill still people vs wm win bean and james welsh conspiracy to obtain under false pretenses from peter johnson of weber county thirty dollars prisoners arraigned before pleading I 1 ea they desired to see sheriff ier if win brown first granted ogden city vs G M banks case dismissed on his paying 50 the costs of this court charles houman hoffman by advice of his counsel withdrew his plea of not guilty and plead guilty mr kimball desired to see wm win brown before answering for his client vandercook charged with gambling want to sec see mr brown became a favorite and peasant pleasant quotation on behalf of prisoner hoffman HofT man mr barratt pleaded in extenuation that the prisoner was intoxicated at the time of committing the offense prisoner welsh having seen I 1 mr brown returned into court and asked for counsel mr bar br wag was appointed to defend him plea not guilty bean pleaded guilty and asked forthe mercy of the court another charge lies against him I 1 capt R smith called attention to tho the case of oneill vs ogden city and was promised a reply on monday ogden city vs 0 vandercook M mr r kimball having seen wm win brown declared himself ready for trial trial jury drawn examined and tile following im paneled geo hiner ephraim jensen C CH H Pars parsons sons samuel banford robert shaw W C warren paul beu bent andrew rose robert G berrett theodore daniels peter later robert P harris A B taylor opened the case officer cerT T H ballantyne Ballant yue was on tho the point of testifying that 0 on u the ath of january 1884 so something eab happened when mr kimba kimball all objected to admit evidence against a gambler because the city charter only authorized the city council to punish by ithe the keeper of a gambling the statute against gambling was passed after the ogden city charter barter J was granted he quoted 2nd and utah case peo people lo 10 vs brown an oregon case mgt ogden en city vs julius kiesel kiessel howard ac ac and contended abata that a city ordinance could not exceed the statute cither either in denom certain games or in ill punishing the gamblers mr ir A B taylor replied quoting various authorities and angui arguing ng that the ordinance was valid he ile also called attention to the powers given under the welfare clause said there was ground to covered be by ordinance not to be thought of a statute thus for instance a man may strip naked by the side of weber river to bathe but if he did eo so in iho the streets of ogden city an offense would bo be committed mckimball Mr Kimball made the concluding argument both gentlemen expounded tho the relations oft of t ho he constitution ution to the tile laws of congress ct et cand the sovereignty witness still sitting in tho the chair ready to testify and the patient jury in their places ready to hear bear testimony the court sustained the damu demurrer arrer of mr kimball dismissing the witnesses and tho the jury and remarking that he lie could not ignore the logan case decided in the territorial su premo preme court against logan city when two judges assented and he lie jud judge emerson dissented tho tile howard vard case quoted was also a strong one mr tanner lanner himself when acting as ogden cites attorney having expressed doubtful doubtfulness nea in in tiie the case he lie then thell conducted and going so far as to make two sections instead of one in the present chiv ordinance against gambling which which he ile afterwards drafted ho ile also drafted a bill for tho the legislative I 1 assembly to pass to remedy the A aw we defect the city charter surely read to suppress gambling and to punish dullish the keepers of gambling gamblin 9 houses As it did not read punish as well as suppress gamblers ho he could not help it As to the sovereign powers mentioned by the counsel no city council nor even tho the legisla legislative t ive assembly itself held one atom of it the city councils held limited power delegated to them by the legislature and the latter the powers delegated to it by congress under the organic act delegated power is is not sovereign power |