The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1889-11-03
THE WAY IT GOES
I'm the WOuld-be State Of
Idaho.
THE ALLEGED TRIAL OF j. HART
On the Charge Of Unlawful CohabitatiOn Be-
fore Jury Arranged to Convict
Peculiar Proceedings.

BLAcKFooT, Oct. 31.-lSpecial CORES
pondence of THE HERALD. The trial OF
James H. Hart, on an Indictment for I'M
lawful cohabitation, from January 2, 1885,
to June6, 1856, was had to-day in the Third
judicial district court of Idaho, Judge G. Fl.
Berry on the bench. d. w. Standrod,
assistant prosecuting attorney, conducted
the prosecution, while the defense was
conducted by Joseph c. Rich and Robert S.
Spence.
We'gave a general description OF the
methods of packing juries in this district in
former communication, and all that Is
necessary to say in this connection is that
the trial jury was one of the regulation
kind. and would compare favorably with
that heroic jury that was the pride and boast
of eX- United States Marshal Dubois, which
he declared would convict Jesus Christ
if brought within its jurisdiction. So, when
the prosecuting attorney, in addressing the
honorable gentlemen, said: Il have ample
confidence, gentlemen, that you viii bring
in verdict of guilty against the defend
ant" it was pretty certain he was correct
Standrod knew his men; chey were the
right men for the proSecuton-Some OF
|
matters every one of them.
The most loud mOuthed and blatant
among them was an apoState Mormon who
has been indicted and convicted on charge
of larceny. This United States juror. dur
ing the trial. had the bad taste to declaim
against the defendant and declare him
guilty before the case had been submitted.
This defamation was i'll public barrOOm,
and was in contempt of the Instructions
given by the court, in defiance of the law
and Of the rights of the defendant, who
should be considered innocent until proved
guilty
The examination of the witnesses showed
concluslvely that there was no evidence
within the period named in the indictment
that was in any way damaging to the dc
| PENDANT, or that would in the remotest
manner Justify conviction, and in any
other class of cases it would insure an ac-
Guittal. Impressed with this condition Of
! the case, the defendants counsel, on mo-
ton, urged the court TO dismiss the case,
flor the reason that the prosecution had
| failed to prove any offense committed
within the time specified, and in fact mad
failed to produce one particle of evidence
| that could possibly justify a convictions
and challenged the prosecution and court TO
point to any such evidence, for the simple
reason there was none. 1t is hardly neceS
sary to say the motion was Overruled. The
| iudge would not assume such responsible
| ity. He is Democrat, and holds his Office
| on condition that he continues to please the
Republican local bosses, who, it is said,
boast that they have MS mead under thelr
thumb.
| The defense was ably conducted and all
that could be desired, but the odds were
| against the attorneys and their client. The
| Judge. in his charge to former jury of this
district, said they should go for the local
| leaders of the Mormon church. The
iuries now impaneled were of the stereO
| typed kind; they are nearly always present
| on these occasions and are bound to convict
when conviction is demanded by the pros
ecution or the court.
| 1t is proper however, TO say that Prose
cutor Standrod apOloSized to the jury Tor
the lack of evidence in this case, by an ap-
peal to their prejudice, insinuating that
the position occupied by defendant III the
community prevented the government from
obtaining the evidence it might otherwise
have obtained. need notsay the plea was
a subterfuge; it was at the best, merely
begging the conviction, but with this kind
of jury it was conclusive.
If anything far her was necessary to lead
this trial Jury up to convict the defendant
it was abundantly furnished by the extra
ordinary charge delivered to the court II.
would be embarrassing to the ave rage
reader TO wade JUFOu5u Ju6 III FfnLu Ct
conjecture and hypothesis through which
the court wandered in this laborious effort
The arguments We're SO tangled up Jnat-
some of them were incomprehensiblG; but
there was no installing the fact, that sAea=
were intended to lead tie jury 70 cGauica
and to make up in verbiage for the lack OF
evidence.
In the Kicks case the court charged the
jury that if it was found that the defend
ant supported his former wives II might be
considered a circumstance tending to his
conviction; but in the present case, finding
no such evidence, the court charged the jury
that supporting their former wives cut no
figure in the question.
1t was, however, in closing this remark
able charge that the court M d its most
brilliant effort. Shaking it's hoary locks
and looking wonderfully wise and deter
mined, the court said: ''If, gentlemen, you
find the defendant lived in the same town
as his plural wives, the presumption of
law is that they were living together as
husband and wife" And so with evidence
no stronger than that contained in this last
proposition, this honorable jury, after Il
few minutes consultation, rendered YER
dict of guilty as charged in the Indictment.
The case viii be appealed to the Terri
torial supreme court if permitted By the
august tribunal of the third judicial dis
| trict.
GENTS FRENCH CALF HAND MADE
Congress Shoes, latest style So 25, worth
| SS IN OF A. Col