Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1893-06-28
BANKER WHITMORE.
Judge BartCh ltiudgsS Hin Guilty Of
Contempt Of COlTi,
But rosrroSEs SENTENCE.
Tho Defendants Counsel Intend 10
Garry the Case 10 the Supreme
Court-A Legal lcbatc.

Judge Bartch this morning, In the
Third district court, gave lis opinion
intho contempt oloo In which Banker
George G. whitmore, OF Nephi, has
played the role Of defendant. The
hearing concluded yesterday At noon,
the fght having been hard one be-
tween the attorneys on both sldos,
'nmcly, Mossrs. Varlnn and Johu NJ.
Zane for the plaintiff l.. a. Scott
ElliuIU and Brown and Henderson
for the defendant. The matter has
excited considerable interest.
His honor remarked that the ptlnci.
pal question which had been raised In
the inyc,tlgation was as to the juris.
dlotion Of this court, the judge Of the
First judicial district having trans.
lcrrod Il here on his own motion. IL was
olsimod ON the part Of the defendants
counsel tina. this was IA Illegal pro.
ceediug. After the transfcunce TO she
Third district court the cmo wac re-.
iorred 10 a referee, by consent q the
parties. Tho referee tried aud deter.
mined It, and his report was coaiifmed
by this court. Then arose the qucslion
No 10 tic suillcleucy of the fanbfcr.
His honor took 1t that the court, hav.
Ing Jurisdiction, had tight 10 trans.
fer, anu tnnt that transfer
was Judgment Of the cCuit.
The court had q right to
inquire into the transfer, especially
when he parties did not rate any
objection thereto. | they had desired 10
DO 10 ihoy SHOULD have objected boiors
this time. There WIS some question 90
to IA order or decree OF this court not
being personally served upon the dc.
iondant, but having been IN court he
must have known Of It, aud his honor
thought, under thoso circumstance,
the court must now adjudgv him guilty
of the contempt alleged. On this trial
the Witnesses showed co siderable
feeling on both sidee. There seemed
b. besJme difficulty between those
| paftigt; tut on the mhiu fAc.i In tho
case, DO far as they np-
puared before him, he did not
wish 10 express an opinion. The de-.
fondant had no right 10 take the law
into his own hands and destroy the
boxes pluced by order Of the court. n
he had been dissatisfied with the de-
cree lie should have sought the proper
legal remedy. Hu was G'Hp0sed, how.
ever, 10 Du somewhat lsuient on GER
tain conditions and would p0,tponc
sentence for period Of ten days. II
In the meantime the defendant re.
stored the bux In accordance with the
decree, and replaced II Ia the same
condition In which lac found II, the
court would take that into considefa.
ton In fixing the punishment.
Attorney NaTian suggested that the
box should be replaced, " at all,
under the direction OF the engineer
who was appointed by the court, anu
whose report was yet upon tho lilies
awaiting confirmation.
The Judge-Couusel should under.
stand that am not making any order
to that effect | simply say that N thu
box is replaced IN the way he found II
1 shall take that into consideration
hereafter.
Attorney BTowu-Wo believe this
20 be an AppealaDle case. We design
to appeal 1t aud have ordered the
transcript already; bur Of courte We
cannot appeal II without Judgment
or final order OF this court, and that
cannot be- until sentence IL
passed. My impression In thai
we would all be better satisfied II full
Judgment could be- rendered now, thai
the appeal may be taken. We would
ask for stay Of say twenty.four hours
or until tomorrow morning. In tn,
meantime we Will present bill oi ex
captions.
Attorney Varian-Thsy want al
appeal aud they want II right away
On tins question We urge that, II tn,
court IL disposed 10 render judgment
now, the oOeroive powers Of this oour
be exercised TO compel this man Il
obey It's decree. We propose that II
advance Bs the other side IL trying /,
act In advance, In order that thefight
Of the plaintiff may receive some pro
lection. That IL more important thar
tho simple impositiOn Of dollars aul
cent?.
Judge HendeTson-lt would seen
that counsel wants your honor 10 pun
ish this defendant for suggesting ever
that he will appeal from this decision
An an cal, II II Ia given 10 US by law
IL our right, aud | submit IL should no
10 even limited that party SHOULD
suffer anything nj the banus Of IN,
court merely because he INTENDS 4
take an appeal to the Supreme court Of
the questions involved In this case, an d
for which we are making preparations
Attorney VarlAn said he hat
been misApprehended. He merely
called attention to the fac
that counsel In anticipation of Thu
courts decision had prepared for tn,
appeal. They were asking for decit
son ofl-haud, and In that event h,
(Mr. Variant would ask that his sug
geaiion as to coerclve action DO con
sideTed.
Judge Bartch-You may present tn
matter tomorrow morning at ioi
O'Clock.
Attorney VarlRn said II was quit
apparent TO his mind that this mattel
had no developed that Judge Bartol
would be disqualified from sitting oi
the appeal OF tile CASE; but his homo
declined TO hear anything further now
remafklng, however, II was impOrtan
that b0th himself and Judge Ian
should not be disqualified by any par
they had taken la the proceeding.