The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1891-10-25
4 SINGULAR AFFAIR
Juror Ruth Signs a Remarkable
Affidavit,
WHICH CAUSES A SENSATION
II is Filed in the Howard Case and Causes a
Breeze-Judge Zane Orders an
Investigation.
WHICH CAUSES A SENSATION

Investigation.
Yesterday was the time fixed for the SEN
tence Of John r. Howard, who on Monday
last was convicted in the Third district
court Of adultery. Howard did not appear.
however, owing to Illness, but the proceed
ings which followed the calling Of his case
were Of highly sensational and unusual
character.
AT II o'clock Prosecutor Stephens called
the matter up. Messrs. Hamilton and
Marsh, who appeared for the defendant,
slgnihed their willingness to proceed.
THE CASE COMES UP.
Mr.. Hamilton stated that Howard was
suffering from an attack of pneumonia, and
he had letter from DR.. Anderson in which
the physician stated that any exposure at
this time might result fatally. The at
torney therefore asked that the matter 60
over until next week
THE BOND INCREASED.
Mr.. Stephens made no objection to this
but suggested that Towards bond should
be Increased to 81, 800.
Mr.. Hamilton objected, but the Court in
creased the bond to the amount stated.
MOTION FOR A NEW TRIAL.
MIR. Hamilton then introduced a motion
Tor new trial on the following grounds:
.l-Insuhclency of the evidence TO Justify
the verdict In this: there was no evidence
embodied in the trial to prove that the de-
fendant had sexual intercourse with Mrs.
Everett.
THAT the verdict is contrary to law in
this, that the jury found their verdict in
tue evidence introduced in the trial on
showing frequent visits of the defendant
ana such ike, without any evidence what
ever to prove the act>of adultery.
3-Che court erred in instructing the
jury In manner which led them to believe
that ii was not necessary for them to urove
any act or acts of sexual intercourse in or
der to convict for adultery, which will more
July appear from an affidavit of L. ]. Ruth
one of the jury who found said verdict
hereto attacked:
REMARKABLE AFFIDAVIT
The affidavit of Mr.. Ruth was as fol-
lows:
II, L. ]. Ruth, being first duly sworn on
my oath depose and say that | was Juror
in the case of the United States of Amer
lea VS., ohm 4. Howard, and as such Juror
consented to and did render verdict of
guilty against the said Howard l so voted
because believed, from the judges charge
TO the jury, that the act of sexual inter
course need not be beyond reasonable
doubt
(Signed.) NJ. J. RUTH
Subscribed and sworn"
JUDGE ZANE SURPRISED
The hearing on the motion was set for
tuesday, but Judge Zane expressed sur
prise that a juror would make such an
affidavit, and he directed the bailiff to brine
Mr.. Ruth into court. The Juror appeared
in q short time, and after he had been
sworn Judge Zane said. IAN affidavit has
been filed here setting forth that YOU didn't
understand that 1t was necessary to prove
the act of sexual intercourse beyopd a rea-
sonable doubt in order to convict
The Juror-The affidavit was NOT so read
to me, your honor.
The Court--Who read it,
The Juror-Mr. Hamilton.
The Court-Let Mr.. Hamilton be brought
IN here a. once
MIR. Stephens-From what have heard
1t looks as though this jury had been tam
pereo with. and 1t ought TO be investigated
MIR. A. A. Sutton, another Juror in the
Howard case, is present. ana l would like
TO have him sworn.
MR.. SUTTOS'S VERSION
Mr.. Sutton was sworn and testified 9.
This matter was first mentioned to me nv
MIR. Marsh, l think, who wanted to know
where the adultery came in. told him
twelve GOOD men. Afterward | met Mr.
Hamilton, who wanted me to give an affi-
davlt to help the poor man out. / snid
couldn't do so without viola ing my oath
He said he was satisfied in his own mind
from what he had heard, that the Jury
didn't understand the charge Of the court
AS Mr.. Hamilton had not been found nv
this time, an adjournment was taken until
Q o. m.
Mr.. HAMILTON EXPLAINS.
MIR. Hamilton was present when the
court met in the afternoon, and he said
that after the jury came in he whit to his
Office A little later Mr.. Marsh came in
and said that 1t had been intimated to MIN
that the jury misunderstood the charge: he
believed that the jury, under the charge
did not know that ii was necessary to
prove the act Of sexual intercourse beyond
g reasonable doubt. ~ told Hmm said
Mr.. Hamilton, that if he would get af4ida-
Wits TO that effect your honor wouldn't let
the judgment stand five minutes. MIR
Marsh came in again the next day and we
discussed the matter of the sufficiency of
the evidence to warrant the verdict. That
afternoon Mr.. Ruth came in and / stated
that had been Informed that several of
the jurors lsoored under the impression
that it was not necessary. in order TO
convict of adultery, to establish the act of
sexual intercourse beyond a reasonable
doubt He said ne SO understood IL I
then wrote the affidavit and read it 10 him
and we discussed it. He said that other
persons had the same understanding.
never approached MIR. Ruth in nv life. If
we misunderstood each other in regard tn
the affidavit, OF course that explanation
must be good.