Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1893-08-09
Investigation Of tho Charge Of Llb!l
Against v. D. Drucs
CASE Fon raE PROSECUTION.
The City Waierworks Superintendent
Proceeds to Explain How lie Hasten.
ed to Segregaie the Accounts.

part Of the complainant In his official
capacity, was Investigated before U. 5.
Commissioner brennan this morn
lag. Tho circumstances leading Up 10
the present proceedings have previous.
| ~ appeared In tue columns VI the
| News.
Ton o'clock was the time SGT for the
commeu cement OF the hearing aud ut
that hour there was large crowd OF
interested spectators on hand, anxious
TO learn all that was about ~ transpiro.
Owing To the limited accommodation
which Commissioner Grccnmau's Of.
iico In the old WSsatoh building az.
oids,it was arranged thattheinvesiira-
ton should take place In the large apari-
ment adjoining, and which formerly
did service ~ the Office Of tbs Third
district court, prior to the removal Of
the courts 10 tho Dooly block. Amt ny
those occupying seats were a number
oi well known tOwnBmCn.
Tue prosecution WAS conducted by
County Attorney Murphy aud Attof-
ney J. NJ. Denny; Mossn. Williams
anu Van Colt represented the de.uu-
dnut who occupied n Beat near his
counsel.
The complaint alleges that Dfuce
"Ou August End, 1893, IN the city aud
county Of Salt Lake, wiliully q I'M
lawfully published and caused 10 be
/ published anu exhibited q false anu
Injurious statement aud affidavit
charging dishonesty ON the part OF w.
IA. Ryan, with intent TO iulure him,o
The defendants attorneys put In an
Appearance on time, aud the commits
sl0ner was ready 81 thko up the case
then and there; but the court, after
waiting In vain for the coming Of
Prosecuting Attorney Murphy tor over
hali-nn.hour, suggested that an officer
be despatched after him. fuu sheriff
was n oordingly started on that GRAND
but very shortly afterwards MossrH.
Murphy aud Denny matorlhliEeu.
Attorney Murphy iirst held private
cQnVeTtption with counefl for the de-
fente, after which he announced that
Attorney Denny, his deputy, would
conduct the examination OF tho wit.
nefses ior the prosecution.
Attorney Williams Questioned
whether tho statute empowered MT.
Murphy % do THE, anu ON this point
some discussion arose.
"Who pays him for his services
asked MIR. Williams.
"rhat h, tako 1t, a matter which
counsel for the defense hBs no
right 10 inquire into" rtjOlned
the county attorney. "rhe question IL
whether | have right 10 appoint q
deputy county attorney. | maintain
that have right under the statute 20
employ n deputy or any number Of
them, for Just Us long or short q time
NJ see ~. Surely no question can
he raised TO the appointment by my.
self OF n reputable attorney under
tuCh circumstances.
Mr.. Williams-It Is not a personal
objection at all. Mf. Denny " not
appointed, nor attempted 10 DO an.
pointed, as a deputy within tho mean.
lug OF the statute. The law says that
when appointed he is % be n "EublioO
officer. Its obviously uni ust that
prosecuting attorney should be APP
pointed for n particular cass-that ho
should bo private counsel TO any
individual or party. The question
which arose here, counsel said, wac
Were Mr.. Denny's services 10 bo paid
for by private individual, or out Of
the county, The Defendant had "a
right TO know; because he was not
subject TO n prosecution at tho hands
Of private individuals and private
counsel. IL already appeared here that
Mr. Denny was 10 be appointed orally
IN court, for this case merely. IL Mr..
Denny was volunteer he objected 10
his appearing. The public, council
added, could take care Of itself.
Mr.. Van Colt remarked that II the
prosecuting attornoy's present plan
were 10 be adopted,s case never would
be dismissed. A public officer should be-
impartial and not retained by
private persons. Did SIR. Denny come
here retained by MI. Ryan or Mr..
Shnfer expecting private fees from
the prosecuting Witnesses In this case.
mpartially-Tendy 10 dismiss this
case II the charge was not made out?
The county attorney believed that
Mr.. Denny would not 40 act, or no
himself would have thought Of having
his services,
The Commissioner, after some fur.
tner conversation, hAli-lhlt Dtlng
preliminary hearing It IN not no ex-
acting rs otse ON trial; yet think IL
ia the duty Of tho prosecuting attorney
TO be- here himself or else require his
regular deputy to be; but II he wishes
TO have Air Jenny 10 alyiBo and con-
suit with him during the progress OF
this inveltiPAtiou-it being
preliminary Our-the court will not |
object aud think II will DO no harm |
In the matter OF Justice to the defond- |
ant. II II were not a case on trial II |
would OF couHe have to
be governed entirely by the |
law and the objections VI counsel. But |
| think the prosecuting attorney should |
be present all the time, In order TO |
have the hearing conducted In proper |
manner.
TESTIMONY FOR THE PROSECUTION.
The taking OF testimony was then
begun.
The first witness was Mr.. John q.
Cannon, editor OF the DEsERisr NEWS. |
Ho was shown u clipping oi lle niilda-
Wit from the NEWS OF August End, anu |
asked-Have you that aiiidavlt with |
you?
Witness-No, sir, have not.
Q-Has 1t not been in your posses.
sion2