Idaho news. (Blackfoot, Idaho) 1887-1891, 1888-08-04
Mr.. lawlc,,s Course.


action of Mr.. Hawley, u. ). Attorney,
for his course in prosecutions under
the Edmunds and Edmunds-Tuchei
Laws, in Southeastern Idaho, openly
charging Mr.. HawleY with having
sold out to the Mormons for practical
reasons, citing numerous instances rs
evidence thereof, when he had failed
to do his duty and properly prosecute.
A similar article appeared in The
Tribune of later date, and on the 2lst
instant another appeared in the Idaho
Enterprise.
On account of my personal and
official relations with Mr.. Hawley, and
my political relations with the Re
publican party and its present Dele
gate in Congress, | cannot in justice
to myself, to Mr.. Hawley, or the party
of which am member, remain silent.
Ever since the appointment of Mr..
Hawley | have acted as his first as
sistant. My first connection with pros
ecutions under the Edmunds law was
ut the April Term, 1886, at Blackfoot,
when 145 indictments were returned,
nearly all for offences under the Ed
munds law Since that time | have
been associated with Mr.. Hawley in
all of his criminal business in South
eastern Idaho, much of the time
taking the lead and assuming the
responsibility for the preliminary
work and the work of the grand jury
room.
Although not in sympathy with
each other politically, the most con
tidential relations have always existed
between us with reference to this
class of prosecutions. 1t is for the
latter reason that | regret the contro-
versy that has arisen and feel called
upon to present the facts in relation
to the cases referred to-. from which
your correspondent and others have
drawn their conclusions.
If | should remain silent | should
feel that my silence might be con
sturtd as giving assent to the charges
and statements made and conclusions
drawn therefrom, against one who has
confided in me, though disagreeing
with him politically.
/ have seen the article published III
The Tribune only once, but have the
Journal article before me, which con-
tains substantially the same statements
THE CASES CITED.
| will first refer to the case of John
W. Taylor Taylor was indicted at the
fall term, 1886, for urging and incit-
ing rebellion, etc, based upon utter
ances made by him at the Mormon
Conference held at Oxford i'll July of
that year.
Franklin Richards and Richard z.
johnson filed demurrer to the in
dictment in Taylor's behalf On ac-
count of the necessary absence of Mr..
Hawley when defen lentA counsel were
ready to take up their demurrer, l
assumed the responsibility of having
the case continued for the term. Dur
ing the winter months much time was
spent by Mr.. Hawley, myself, and
others, in thorough examination OF
the case, and we could only conclude
that the demurrer must inevitably be
sustained. For that reason it was de
cided before the commencement OF
the spring term that the case would
be dismissed, and | think counsel for
Taylor were advised of that conclu-
sion. Although the prosecutions failed
in establishing the precedent which
was desired, yet we have never heard
OF the youthful apostle openly pro
claiming his reasonable doctrines in
idaho Territory since that time.
While the responsibility Of dismiss
ing the case without argument resteC
with Mr.. Hawley, his course was only
determined after the fullest examina
ton and consultation with myself al
lis assistant
THE CASE OF BULGE.
Reference is also made to the cas-
of president" Bulge of Bear LAX,
County, Bulge was indicted at til,
fall term, 1885, by Mr.. Hawley. H
was arrested at Ogden in June, 1887
and tried at Blackfoot at the Octobel
term following.
| attended his examination Chi
arrest having been made on com
missloner's warranty and directed tn
preparation of the case for trial;
large number of subpgnas were issue,
and placed in the hands of the Marsha
but no member of Budge's famiI
could be found, and his nearest neigh
bors, who had passed his home ever
day for years, knew no more of hi
family relations or the names of th
women and children that lived in hi
houses, than people who had neye
seen Bear Lake county
No case against a polygamou
Mormon has ever been pressed NOR
vigorously, but it failed, not fro1
lack of proper prosecution, but OF
account of the deliberate periury n