The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1886-07-21


court or grand jury had Jurisdiction
over the matter which the jury was in
vestigating.
Mr.. Dickson replied. affirming that it
was unnecessary for the grand Jury TO
have jurisdiction of the subject matter
OF the investigation TO make an indict-
ment valid.
Mr.. Kimball closed the argument,
and the Court, after a few moments
consideration, rendered a decision. in
the course OF which he said that
II was plain under the common
law that the indictment was not sui
hcient; but the question arises whether
It was sufficient under the Territorial
statute. After examining the statute
ana the Indictment the G, urt held that
the Indictment was sufficient. The OBJ
lection was overruled and an exception
noted.
Q. p. Herman was the first witness
called by the prosecution. He testified:
Am memebr OF the present Grand
jury; was on the I'd day of July; VIM.
J. Woods IS foreman of that body;
know Judge o. W. Powers; know Miss
Sarah Herrick; was present at the ses-
sion OF the Grand Jury held on the ID
day OF July. The Grand Jury was on
that day investigating certain .ibelous
matters connecting the names of
Judge Powers and Miss Herrick; Judge
Powers made the complaint to the
Grand Jury; the complaint was an oral
one.
The Judge said that L. W. Hemen
way had in his possession some affi-
dayits that charged him with seduction
and bastardy. The Grand Jury examined
Mr.. Hemenway as to what he knew of
the matter. Judge Emerson. Mr..
HObson and several other witnesses
were also examined. The prosecution
asked what Hemenway had testified to
in regard to the affidavits in question.
| Objected to by the defense. Sustained.
/ Other questions were asked on the
same line and a considerable discussion
between counsel ar, Sc. The question
was decided in favor OF the defense.
Continuing. The def ndant was sum-
moned as a witness in the. case; he
took an oath TO III the truth, the whole
truth and nothing but the truth.
Q.-State what Mr.. Greenwich testi-
/ flea to in that investigation
Objected to. Objection oyerruled.
AIR. Greenwich stated that he was
coming from Kaysville about two
months ago with some sheep. As he
was coming over the sand ridge he saw
buggy and Judge Powers and Miss
/ Herrick; they were about five PAGES
from the road; that he thought il
was very strange that they should be
there as she is a Mormon and he the
Judge here, and never fails to give them
the full extent of the law. GreenWell
testified that he knew Judge Powers
and knew Sarah Herrick. and had
known her since she was a girl; he
could not have been mistaken as to the
| identity OF the parties. The witness
was called for the purpose OF ascertain
/ ing whether the affidayits had been
published. He was called for the pur-
| pose of ascertaining whether there were
any truth in the report.
| Cross xamined-Greenweu said ii
was about three months ago that be
saw Powers and Henri k; or about the
/ lst of April.
Q.-How did you fix the date at the
| 18th OF Aprll2
A.-By another cambridge.
| Asked as to whether Greenwell testified
/ to where he saw the parties, tie witness
stated that he said it was on the Sand
ridge; did not understand him TO name
any other place.
JAMES IvERsoN, another member OF
the Grand Jury, was called. He testi-
| fed: Was present at a meeting of the
|
July ID, made a complaint before the
Grand Jury that some ibelous matter
had been published concerning him and
Miss HerTick. The witness then reiter-
ated the testimony of the former wit
ness as TO what the Judges complaint
contained; Greenwich being before the
Grand Jury, and mis- testimony before
that body. He said that Greenwich tes-
titled to having seen the parties at the
foot of the second bench from
Weber River, and as TO his thinking
it strange that they should be together
Cross-examInation. Q. What.Green-
well said in relation to it being remark
abe, was in answer 10 a question by 6
Grand JuTy2
VIM. ]. Wood foreman OF the Grand
Jury, was next called. The testimony
of Mr.. Wood was very similar to thai
of the other witnesses. differing only il
some minor details. He said Greenwel
testified that the roads forked at the
place where he saw Judge Powers and
Miss Herrick.
Ambrose Hill, clerk of Mr.. Green
well, was the next witness called. Is il
the employ of the defendant; remem-
Der the occasion of his bringing some
sheep from Kaysville; IL was either the
26th of April or the Sd of May. HI
brought three lambs in a buggy from
Riyerdale about the 18th; could no
say positively that that was the date
A little diversion was created here by
the replies of the witness as to the posi
ton of the Judge and the young lady
The witness had heard Mr.. Greenwel
say he had a talk with Mr.. Hobson
concerning tie matter; their conversa
ton was in the back part OF the butcher
shop; saw no affi iayits; never knew o
any having been drawn. He went TO
the sheep on Monday; cannot say wha
day he went after the sheep.
At the conclusion Of the testimony o
the witness, the jury was placed in tn
custody of an officer until morning
Judge Zane stepped down and yudg
Powers took his seat on the bench ant
Mr.. Dickson. Clerk Perkins and III
Judge INDUCED in quiet tete-a-tete.
Personal and General.