The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1890-10-24
WELL, WHAT'S NEXT?
Dyer is Responsible for the
Sssancil House Property.
THE CLERK HIRE WAS IMPROPER.
Judge Hardness Report in the Main Con-
firmed-What viii the Harvest Be?
Well See.

in full below. Accompanying the report
are the requests in detail as submitted by
the attorneys for the defense, and also by
the district attorney, giving reasons why
they were either refused or allowed. The
report below, however, covers every point:
ssSupreme court, territory of Utah, United
States of America plaintiff VS.. the late
CORPORATION of the Church Of Jesus
Christ OF Latter day Saints ct al. de-
T PENDANTS.
srTo the Supreme Court of the Territory Of
Utah:
SPY an act of the court made on the 18th
day of July, 1890, the undersigned was ap-
pointed special examiner and commls-
sioner in this cause, to examine the reports
made by Frank H. Dyer, receiver therein,
also all the vouchers, contracts, transac-
tions, acts and doings relating to his duties
as such receiver, and to make a full report
to the court of his conclusions OF fact and
law relating thereto.
''In compliance Herewith | proceeded on
the 1st day of Semptember, 1890, 10 take
testimony respecting all the matters d.
rected by said order, and from time to time
continued such examination until the 18th
day of October, 1890, when the same was
completed.
During the examination the plaintiff
was represented by Charles S. Varian,
ESQ.,, as counsel; the receiver by Farley L. |
Williams, Esq, Messrs. Sutherland &
Judd and Arthur Brown, ESQ.,; and the de- |
PENDANT by f. S. Richards, ESQ.,, and LIE
Grand Young, Esq. |
.'As part of my report I herewith re- |
turn to the court, certified to by me, all
the testimony taken in the proceeding, |
with the documentary evidence and ex-
hlbits offered by the respective parties and
received in evidence by me. In the pro- |
gress of the hearing, the counsel repre-
senting the plaintiff offered In evidence,
which was admitted without objection, the
testimony and documentary proofs, ex-
hibits, pleadings and proceedings in the
examinations heretofore had under the
order of the court by Special Examiners
E. T. Sprague, Esq, and Robert Hank
ness, ESQ. The testimony taken on such
former examinations, with all the exhibits
filed therein, are herewith returned as
part of this report. The greater part of
the evidence taken by Examiner Hank
ness also the testimony taken by me, re-
lates to the conduct of the receiver in max
ing certain compromises respecting real
and personal property claimed by the
plaintiff, tie United States, to be the
property of the church, defendant, andsub-
1ect TO escheat under the acts of Congress,
known as the Edmunds-Tucker act and the
anti-polygamy act of July 8 1862.
IL find from all the evidence submitted
that the statement of facts set forth in the
report of Examiner Hardness, filed in this
court on the Goth day of February, 1889, is
substantially correct, and the facts relating
to the conduct and compromises made by
the receiver prior to that date are so fully
set forth in it that l deem it unnecessary
to repeat them here. They are referred to
and made part of this report. The report
of Examiner Hardness was submitted to
this court and, on the % day of March,
1889, its decision was rendered approving
its findings and conclusions of law. The
evidence taken by me IN most respects re-
lates to the acts and transactions of the
receiver, which were investigated by Elk
aminer Hardness. In large degree it is
but a repetition of the evidence relating to
the acts and doings by the receiver taken
by that officer, and find that it does not
Justify finders of fact and conclusions of
law which would substantially differ from
those found by him.
2-'On the 4th day of April, 1888, the re-
ceiver commenced an action, No. 1862, in
the district court of the Third judicial dis
trict, Salt Lake county, Utah territory,
against Horace S. Eldredge. the Salt Lake
Literary and Scientific association, a cor
poration, and others. This suit was brought
to obtain a decree of the court that all of
lot S, in block 20, plat A, Salt Lake city
survey, known as the constitutional block,
was at the time of its disincorporatiou the
ieet to escheat under the acts of Congress
mentioned. A Joint answer was filed by the
said defendants in the suit and it appears
that the defendant, the Salt Lake Literary
and Scientific association, claimed title to
the northeast corner of the lot in contro
versy five rods by five rods, known as the
Council house corner. During the pen
dency of this suit, the receiver, with the
advice of his counsel entered into negotia-
tions with the defendants for q compromise
of the action, excepting and reserving from
compromise that portion of the lot claimed
by the defendant, the Salt Lake Literary
and Scientific association. AS a result O.
the negotiations, on July 9, 1888, the re
ceiver fled in the supreme court of the ter
r1tory petition, praying, among
other things, for an order Of tn,
court authorizing him, upon tn,
payment to him by the defendants of th
sum Of $50, Is, TO dismiss the suit, ex
cept as to that portion of said lot s, il
block 20, plat A, above described, anC
claimed by the association defendant. Oh
the date when the petition was filed, tn
supreme court made decree by which
among other matters, it was adjudged tina
the receiver be authorized and empowers
to accept said sum in compromise and SET
Element of the suit, and to dismiss tn
same, or submit to the entry of a decree il
favor of the respective defendants in &C
cordance with the terms Of the petition
After the entry of this decree and as
result of the compromise and settlement
which it sets forth, the attorneys for tn
defendants, Horace Eldredge and others
applied to the Third district court for
decree in favor of the defendants, and O
the 18th day of December, 1888, a deere
was accordingly made by the court, b.
which it was adjudged that the receive
take nothing by his said action, and tina
the title of the property is now held by
and the same is adjudged to be in, the sel
eral parties defendant who held the sam
free from any trusts or conditions Tn
decree describes specifically the POI
tions of lot s, block 20, plat
the titles to which are adjudged to b
vested free from any trusts or condition
In the several defendants, Henry Dir
woodey, R. b. Young, Joseph o. Young
John c. Cutler, Wooley, Young g. Hard
company, the Home Fire Insurance com
pany, Elias Morris, Caroline e. Dye, Wi
liam A. Rossiter, Hyrum Clawson, and ,
H. Parry & Co., but it contains no sep;
rate description of the Council House CO.
ner lot claimed by the defendant, the Sa
Lake Literary and Scientific association
Much of the testimony taken by me r,
lates to the receivers responsibility, if an,
for the making of this decree in the for
in which it was entered. 1t appears on il
face to be final decree in favor of the Ii
erary and Scientific association and again,
lne receiver, adiudging the title to ii
Council House corner lot to be in the ASS
..ation free from any trusts in favor of Il
..hsrah defendant; and it would, unle
1so-..ied in that respect, operate as b;
- any further claim made by the receiv,
OF the United States for the premises,
subject to escheat under the acts of Coz
gress mentioned. 1t is not in accordan,
with the petition filed by the receiver, r
serving and excepting the lot claimed |
the association from compromise and Sc
f1onnept Rv tho farms of tho comnrou-;