Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1893-08-16
DRUCE DISCHARGED
The Evidence Does Not Justify His
Being Held.
sOsAID COMMISSIONER GREESMAN.
There Was No Libel In the Affidavit
Made by Drucr, Nor In the
Justification.

The case OF the People VA bruce
came on n little ahead Of schedule
time Ms the same was arranged yester.
day, by agreement OF attlrneys. The
hour for the determination was fixed
at y. IN. instead of ., aud shortly
alter tne former TINS Commissioner
Gtcrnman was on hand, his only
attendant for several miuu,os being
NLWs representative. soon Attorney
Williams entered, followed In close
order by MossH. Van Cot anu
Murphy and after come little do,ul.
tory conversation Williams announced
that he was willing 10 40
ON without the IftseLCe u
tbs defendant. The attorneys con.
icfrod uuoily as 10 tue legality OF
suCn "a lrbCvUiing bui there Ing no
COLn cinr opinion NJ g. its correct.
utBs According ~ the statute, the court
baidi "W oil, With tuat understanding,
then, We viii not wait auy lOnger."
"ihute urem to to two elements In
this question:" continued his
honor. "Tno mt II, Is tue
statement or AFFIDAVIT OF tho
defendant litel1us, anu ~ ~, was II
| published or gwen Uut with malicious
intent. the second element " c1ur,e
/ ~ the Justification. IL that should bp
/ considered lurlJus then there n not
| Justification. l tniuk u has been we'll
remarked ny counsel that the language
Of the affidavit itself IL not liboious.
That IL NY opinion. 10 Is only 10 10
considered libelOus when the ~ OF
I ahANra
malicious, evil intent, aud that 10 was
susceptible Of the construction OF libel.
am inclined 10 think under the score
which this cnse has taken, and tue
evidence ailucud Ia Justification, that
the only way IA when we eau consider
this affidavit iibcious would be from
the fac, thht u was given wide publi-
cation, that IN ADDITION " the publish.
rag Of the ailllavlt itself comments
were made upon the matter, aud IN
those comments chaTgea were made
AGAINST "A certain Individual. rhp
affidavit iuelf does not chAfge any
Individual with doing any wrong
ouly by intimatlJn; aud l am ia grave
! doubt, sittiug ~ committing
| may iHtTatt--as un examining mag.
| istfaie-whelhor would have a rigut
| 10 comment upon or take into cOnsiIe,.
| alton the uttefauces OF those VIM
sought % throw difCredit upon aus
individual by reason Of such al Aiild..
| Wit having been made, aud the prime
/ ing Of their Individual thoughts or
| opinions. 10 Ia hardly worth willis
| iUr ms 10 make any comments
| upon the evidence that has been gwen
| Ia this examination; think everyone
unurrstands that perhaps m well Us the
count, II has caused great deal Of
| speculation and talk and all that kind
Uf thing, which Of course / have not
paid any attention TO, for l DO not
think II was within my province 10
take II into consideration ut all. Con.
svgucntly / DO not think II Is worth
vale for me 10 consider theuiter.
nnCey OF any Individual or newspaper
now Ia regard 10 the effect Of tins AN.
dnyit. Therefore without ANY further
remark on tue subject / really do not
believe Ia tue light Il the facts srt
forth Ia that affidavit, Ia tho light OF
tue evidence that was adduced,
ip Justification that would be iusu.
lieu IN imIOBing any COSTS, further
examinations or Investigations upon
the people Of the Territory; because 1
DO not believe that II this east was
brought before tue grand Jury they
would indict. really do not believe
they would. Consequently IA the
light Of all tie evidence aud In
the light OF the 'lildGvit, | shall have
to discharge deiolIau., aud that will
uu the order.
Mr.. Williams-I will ask also that
your honor mako notation that tho
UOndsmen on the defendants bond be-
exuuUrated.
The Commissioner Yes, the bonds-
men viii be eXauOrated.
And thus the play ended.