Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1890-10-11
THE DYER CASE REsrnFD
Evidence STRICKEN Out and riuiihs.
Presented.

i'e7iOner stone held court IN
Mr.. Narian's lsw office this morn.
Z ing when the Dyer esamination
Q was fes.iEned.
: Mr.. Narian offered a no,ion 70
strike out portions Of the testimony
S Of j. p. Bache, F. +. MeGurrin
Z Frank Mohatand F. H. DYER. going
TO show that Judge zlue was form.
eriy an attorney in the case. on the
ground that It was Irrelevant and
immateriai. In support Of the mo-
: non, he utsei thu; the .concof this
examination was confined to an in
SesusatiOn Of Mr.. Dyer's accounts
anu evidence regarding Judge
AAne's former connection with the
case as an attorney, should be
stricken from this record,
Judge judi and Arthur Brown
interrupted the speaker to sly that
me evidence in question was no,
intended to be the blsis Of any find
Ing by this commissioner, but as a
foundation for action IN the court.
Mr.. Narian ssid the-evIjence had
no Place, properly, ii Tins record
and II The purpose oft was tc smirch
one ofthe judges Of the court ap-
pointing this Commissioner. that |
would be an additional reason why |
this Commissioner should strike out |
the testimony,
Arthur Brown made a warm
speech In opposition TO sIr. Varlan,-
hoiion, holding that il was proDer
70 show In the record the relation
o. ~ the parties He agreed with
ar. arians tharit would b. scandal.
Gus Tor judge on the bench 10 sav
OF a case in which ne ouce
acted rs attorney: II didn't exact
y IKE The result OF an examination
hau IN that case when was an
atoTney In II, / will now ap,,oiut a
commissioner 10 re-examine ft.D
lie advanced reasons why. in his
opinion, the evidence -houlj remain
In the record.
Judge Judd said neither n. nor
his associates desired 10 sran,l,ii1s a
!uuge; They merely stood upon
their legal rights.
Dir. Narisn made the closing ar-
gunent In support Of his motion b.
strike OUT. He held that il facts ex-
istei which made it improper FOR
Judge Zane to sit in this case. the
place 70 show those facts was in the
territorial Supreme Court, and not
osfore this commissioner. He held
mat the attempt to get such evil
uenee before that court by means OF
this proceeding, was improper.
Commissioner Stone said the orler :
appointing him required him TO ex-
anime hr. Dyer's accounts ani do !
lngs as receiver. but not toiinquire
into other matters. He had no
authority to inquire into the right /,
OF Judge Zane 20 partipate in The
order for this examination. The
only question in his mind was :
whether the defense, for the pur- q
poses they had stated, had Il right
70 Include in the record the evi. ,
dence in question. The files Of the
case, he said, show that Judge Zane
was ouce an attorney in it, and the
testimony in question was only 4.
cumulative 10 that evidence.
After a long discussion Of the !,
matter, IN which Messrs. Narian,
Judd, Arthur Brown and the com .,
took part, the latter grant :,
dMr. Narian's motion 10 strike out. y
The defense took an exception. =
MI Narian thea read a lengthy
document embracing the findings Of 4
act requested 10y the United States :,
70 be made.
Mr.. Blown asked II the district I,
attorney was responsible for present. n
ng those findings. \,
Mr.. Narian replied ailirmatively, ;.
md said he would sign them. ;,
Commissioned Stone remarked
hat in regard 10 findings. he would
ny this: As to all matters embraced a.
n theexaminaticn hell before Judge =,
and covered by his find
ngs, he, COMMISSIONS St1ney =,
would confirm those findings; rs. in !.
lis opinion, there had becn no evil a.
lence in this proceeding, the effect IN
4 which was to change the result Of =.
be investigation befO.- Judge =.
farAness- He also intimsted that =,
Ie w0Ill find that the receiver had
cen guilty Of impropriety. bu; not ri,
I dishonesty, in usins Sill go Of ~,
he fund for his own purposes, and
he same had been repaid with in 81,
-rest; asd that he would find that a.,
he receiver and his slIreties were -
for any luss % the fund, m.
II should trsnspire that, through / NJ
Is neglect, the Council House m,
roperty has passed beyond the ~.
sach OF the government. an
Judge Judd-But the decree in g.
he Eldridge case, % far as il effects In
he Council House ccrneT. il hFolder o.,
ian the findings upon which il ~,
a based, and Is therefore void as ~
that property. a.
Commissioner StOne-I dnn's n.
link 81. the whole Of that lot was -,
issue. and the decree explicitly a.,
fines the titles TO the several -,
aimants.
sir. Brown said he wOuld ask the -,
MN ssiOner 10 tind that the mat nj
: embraced ia this eNtmiuatt0n be,
Ill already been adjudicated. L.,
The commissioner said he would W,
ave thatquestion to lie passed upon ;he
: the court -.
II was understood that the sttor- ~,
,ys for the receiver would be given Ia
ne in which 20 present findings, .
Id the court adjourned without de- out
y. ~
It now only remains for the COM tat'
issiOneE to make or infect findings -,
requestei by the parties, and to cal
C his report. rry