The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1889-01-20
THE SUPREME COURT.
The Perjury Case Against
Byron W. Brown
ARGUED AND SUBMITTED.
Other Business Before Judges Sand
ford, Henderson and Boreman,
on Saturday.

The case of the United States of
America. respondent, VS.. Byron W.
Brown, appellant, was argued before
the three judges yesterday. The de-
PENDANT had been convicted of the
crime of perjury in the First District
Court, and he had moved for a new
trial on the ground that the verdict
was contrary to the evidence. The
motion was overruled in the court be-
low, and an appeal taken.
The evidence in the court below
tended to show that at the February,
term, 1858, of the First District Cour:,
sitting at Provo, the defendant was
summoned and appeared as a grand
Juror of said court; that there were
numerous cases of polygamy and I'M
lawful cohabitation pending and await
ing the action of said grand jury, and
defendant was duly sworn ana exam
ined as to his qualifications to sit as a
grand juror; that in the course of said
examination defendant, in answer to
questions of the district attorney,
stated that he die not believe polygamy
was right; he believed it was wrong;
that he
DID NOT BELIEVE IT RIGHT
to cohabit with more than one woman
even il there were no law against it.
The defendant further stated that he
was a member of the Mormon church,
| and had recently returned from mis-
sion; the evidence also tended to prove
that defendant WAS challenged, for
what cause does not appear, and was
excused. Some time after said examin-
alton he was asked by various friends
why he made the statements he did
upon the examination, and answered in
each case that he knew polygamy was
right; that with him it was no longer
matter of belief. Defendant was d
mem Der of the Mormon Church and
held the Office of Seventy and had re-
Gently returned from mission to the
Southern States; that at the August
election in 1887, when the constitution
for the State of Utah was presented to
the voters of the Territory for ratidca-
ton, defendant was an agent of the
Peoples Party in securing votes for the
| constitution, and at or near the polls
Oh election daystated TO one OF the wit
nesses that it was right to
MAKE PoLYGAMY A CRIME
in the Constitution, so that only those
who we're good and pure would venture
into it in the face OF the penalties pro-
vided. The evidence tended to show
that his general reputation for truth
and veIacity is good, and it further ap-
/ 4haA 5Af 4l.n 1rrx fr,I,, q
of polygamy Is not essential to mem
bership or good standing in the Nor
mon chul Oh. The above is in sub
stance the evidence upon the trial Of
the case.
The case VS. argued by Peter!
for the respondent and Thurman fol
the appellant.
MIR. Peters claimed that he was eithe
guilty of parjury or else he was hypo
critic. Replying to this, Mr.. Thurman
said: 1T is, and perhaps honestly
claimed by perhaps the larger portion
OF non-believers In the Mormtn creet
that Mormons. as q rule,
ARE NOT SINCERE
in their protested balief in the rightful
ness Of polvgamy, but that the lnsiitu
ton and practice of that principle ha
Its foundation in the baser instincts q
b imam nature-sensuality and lust.
Is not pertinent to our hypothesis Il
, moralizs upon the correctness or incor
rectness of this proposition; but we re-
spectfully submit that it is unjust aE(
inconsistent on the one hand to assum,
that Mormons, as rule, do not believe
in polvgamy. in order to characterize
them as knaves and hyp0crites; and OF
the other hand to presume that they d.
believe in it, in order to get them int
the penitentiary. If men are to b,
at least be founded upoE the common
unless they are so founded they hav,
: no place in court of justice. 1t can
E not be denied in the case at bar tina
: the defendant was convicted upon pre-
sumptions alone; his opposing state
ments afforded no clue to his actua
belief, his membership and position il
: the Mormon Church, and the so-eallet
presumptions flowing therefrom wer
wrongfully, as we believe. suffered b,
the ju y to overcome the presumpt OF
of Innocence. and for this reason ant
because we believe the evidence was in
efficient the defendant requests tina
! the case be remanded and new tria
ordered.
TEE CASE AGAINST CLARK.
The case of the United States vs.
Joseph Clark was also argued durin
the day, submitted and taken under ad
vIsement. rs.