Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1894-11-24
BROWN THE WINNER.
the VERDICT WAS UNANIMOUS.
Bat tho Drrnlans nlrud 10 Carry the
Case 10 the Supreme Court
on Appeal,


ri,... ..,....,.. -,...
was u'l uNN' H'o minutes pas!
uIuu O'clock this morning that the
| jury brf -u whom had been tried tho
brown. y',.B,t5g Iu,,t.t,tt .rrly.t NJ ,
| y.,.,.., r....,,-,,,''.,,.-...
"'N "-N sue 'l''''i uH'
''' .N'i".ia'l"u over tilgc lO,-u A' 60.
yCsiHr Hy, aud thrir discussion con.
uuur turlu.h ..t tIi. ygt..i. rt..tt
V.. t.....
"' ""'m l'o"ol
iN'' "'4 "NEsAIii Nitu into tleir box
d Tow miUU.y- before O'Clock. and AS
uJu az Cgig. JustIr. Ai.rrI.t tst
..t..., ,.f....,.......
-. va '''u .'"e" 100 0al''i
"I'H 'uo 'I-ih ID loil lHtu'
All having uuHwurrd % tnulr names,
.uu court n4.rl-tirutlrf1r bsy. g,.,,
.. .r,...i .,,,,.... 81. .y.s..,..r
80. '.'
We HANe' your uYlob" answered
Foreman George swan.
Tine written yrrlIr. VIVA bo,s,t D.,
.I..s D.,.t.., ..i...,...t.., 49,.
"''' '''' %. '.'''"''
- NI.hut hi1Whi IlA.uiil, against tho
lilNAhp iuniiHuing company COr-
vL'lon'
We luo Jur % OmmuHloI lu the
above rh'r, hui tue issues Tor tue
fiAluuA huA n-fcts bis DAMAGE Ga tho
tum % s.,'ll"
lihc amount sued fIr was so, IuD)
80" plltniII, WUu was 90 ,ls tItus
heaIcl siu o. tue muuutfa Ji .hu ulf,
NlAIu 400 IggE.mgut u 100 delight,
lhuI around uuI ssii.eI 90 cvlrg.
"'It. ll. Whituu u4.il 4II tNu tIuvyr.
sal.u wuIg. ull1, Ell tuu announce.
Iyu. Oi iIu YER IIg. NhHurr. then
.uil thu u.uT, MANAGER Iauusu va.
.nu uuly representative Ui .h, yr.buio
ITr-rui, besides counsel.
Judge Powers asked that the Jury
b lYlyu.
Inls was dDu1 uud 10 was found th4t
TIC verde. was a unanimous one.
Judge PJwtrs tuen sa.d that a.
quito au amount OF tgsum1uy
would have 90 be ttAnsciIbeu Nv
,he reporter, the usfcudant's counsel
uil not Uu ready ~ carry their cafe
" the Territorial supreme court al tho
January term. lie therefore ueGirui 10
ask i1f blAly uays' timuIn winch 10
p,rIufo Aul serve statement on motion
ipl q new tslul.
Judge huu4ursun, OF COUNSEL Tor the
70 the time applied tor; hu thought that
was rcasonauiri hut that ~ 'uli not, hn
insisted inriudc stay lf prJcssuiugT.
JudRu i0wers fcl0iuod that 10 was,of
course usual 10 grant a stay or pro.
Gee lngs ~ the me time.
Judge HeudefsYu--Asto that want
70 OlJrgi anu also toshOw reasons why
+" 'nuNid NOT DO granted. There are
sptclaI reasons why 10 should not
Do uoho ~ lhis cAsc. The court Will
Itmrmutl thAt On thc trial Of tho case
WV Nltutan 1oodWlu testified that the
tIWA"o property belonged 20 Nc.
AAAHAh cu1lflIyi hnl rurh 1 uutuf-
thuu To- DO tue Egii that 10, the prop
cry belongs % tue PRECEDENT Ot tho
COM any, vino 10 u1t party Co this
t't' we hH'N noe the slightest Oh
letIpA 20 .hrIf having aIl reasonable
'lmt' ud 30 Ter us Sue stay u. ps9guuI-
lt 81 De- rpactfutl We have 900 objection
10 ,t'. 90 ihc ptr-l sent OF tho company
" %. come 'HiWHfd NhA bnU me oHIEaI.
~ io' tAo pas moui % this Judgment
10 % "a nhaHy uNut'l' hui 90 s1y thnt
. It H-h. To- eusliuirly auiuruIuuG 30
" Ae 10 bIpt'El hufr now nuI q tay
Us In.l 10 'Nri Sky uayS without auy
security anl under tuCn CItcun..
IL, We ~" .A'' '"N eH"aAhis
5ul.t l""'fa thl' 10 Appeared Lcro
'lAt ''i' LAuhhu Wa sac principal
'"N'ehVIA'E' Ahu uf.rn iaut company
~ vl'losA''9h anu STOOD on tue
same NA-la ~ any 'lhrL Even u tue
-loeh Hhuuli To transferred, tins juIg-
n,L' Wulld SUN stand,
JuuSr Merritt remarked that no WAS
ho' uI-plsrl - make rule against tuIs
'li lof'uoh 'hHt ha had not against
'thuHr' ~ any lIu'i were hereafter
'ho"h lhat any atlrmp. was bulug
maze on inc part % the corporation 90
,e' ilu OF thIs pfJp.f'y, iu ,rIur 10 cs.