Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1894-12-08
MORE BREAKERS AHEAD.
Judge BaTtCh!s Decision on the Case
This Morning,
THE FORMER ORDER REVOKED,
hut tho chief Has been Notified
TO neAppear nefsre tho brand
Jury Next Monday.

Jury Next huuuhIs
The result Of Judge Bar,ch's ruling
IN the Pratt, haboaa corpus case this
morning was the discharge from cue.
tody Of the chief aud his two subordi.
nates, Sheets and Ferguson, and they
are now once more ON duty at the city
hall. II trauspires that the previous
order Of commitment ~ 10 the defend
ants was irregular aud the court has
now demanded" them, pro IOfmd,
TO the grand jury, which body mott.
fed Mr.. Pratt, shortly after his Ie.
lease by Judge Barlch, to attend be.
fore them next Monday, At 10 B.m.
As consequence OF this further inter.
eating developments may be looked
for.
The Third district court room wa
crowded to excess this morning when
Judge Bartch took his seat upon tho
bench, aud when he was about to start
upon the rendering OF his decision tho
district attorney interpOsod, when the
following brlei dialogue ensueu;
The NEWS report OF the Pratt habeaa
corpus pr0coedinga closed yesterday
afternoon at 8:jJ, whom Judge Powers
was about ~ conclude his argument.
Counsel demanded tho release OF
Chief Pratt M n matter Of justice.
Assistant District Attorney Hownl
made the closing reply tor the prOsecu.
ton, saying that tue Issuing Of tho
writ OF habtas corpus was altogether
an error. This action amounted ~ the
court reviewing itself Yesterday it
committed Chief Pratt for contempt,
aud tho only question at this stage was,
"5hall the court tuccunib 10 Mr.. Pratt
or shall Mr.. Pratt yield TO the COURT"
On the question OF privilege, counsel
said 1t was foolish 10 make such
claim. Suppose the chief, Ia his official
capacity, should hear Of Ted-hnndod
murder, pnd should form tho opinion
that II was not conducive to public
Justice 10 give up the name Oi the
murderer, would, asked tho counsel,
that be considered privileged inlofma-
tlOn2 Court had already passed on the
suiilclency Of the commitment. No
man or woman was 40 low Ia this cOun.
ny that no or she could DO presented In
court 10 answer TO this charge Of felony
without being presented by tho grand
Jury. Neither was any man OF woman
20 high that his or her conduct could
not be examined into by the grand
Jury and there was no man 90 high
that no could dictate 10 the grand
Jury. That the question was properly
asked by the grand Jury " admitted
Ia this petition, said Judge HOwAt, anu
no matter how good Mr. PTatpa inlou.
tons were, anu no doubt they were
good, Ia promising not 10 divulge the
npme OF the woman, he IL absoiyed
from the promise by the court and by
tho law. This court ought not and
cannot afford 10 lot ilH oTgeTs be dened
and the demurrer 10 tho complaint
should DO sustained.
Judge Bartch then said that he had
Intended passing on tue question NJ
once, but aa the point OF the sum cheney
Of the writ OF commitment had been
raised, lac desired 10 further examine
the papers and would therefore taks IL
under advlsoment until 10 O'Clock on
Saturday morning.
II Chief Pratt was driven back 10 the
penitentlary later In the day and there
spent another night with his two
observation-disclosures anu Ferguson
committed on tho previous afternoon.
District Attorney Judd said-Il the
court please, the prisoner, Mr.. Pratt, 10
not here.
Judge Powor-He is In the custody
OF tho officers and We have to wait
their pleasure.
Judge Baftoh-The marshal may
bring the ohiei OF police into court.
The order was oboyed with Rlacrity.
Chief Pratt appeared within few
moments aud took his seat beside his
oounsol-Judgo Powers and Commits.
hi0ner Harmed Pratt.
Then Judge Bartch proceeded 20
deliver his Judgment. "ln tho matter
Of the application Of Arthur Pratt,
chief OF police OF this city, for a writ OF
hAbeas corpus" he said, 81 might
state that there has been somr
comment In regard 10 tho granting Of
that witt by the court who committed
the prisoner Tor contempt. When the
case fifat came bsi0rs tho court IL waa
In the midst Of another tfial-of other
buslnoss-and then tookit for gaantod
that II was simply matter as go
whether or not tue question was prop
erly pfopuunued 10 the witness aud Tor
ile utclHlpn OF the court thereon, The
matter came up lin an Informal way.
The point WINS afterwards raised AZ 10
tho irregularlty OF the proceeding, and
for that reason, as we'll az that the
question In ono Of great Importance us
affecting the naturalization OF Justice,
NO to the enforcing the orders OF this
court, / thought II boat to
allow the writ, and no have
the proceedings reviewed, ia order 10
geta full understanding thereon, thp
case having assumed ths shape where
the officer refused 10 answer tue que,.
tions put To him before the gfanl
IuTy."
The main questions now presented
10 the court, ths Judge went on TO say,
we're, hrei, had no Jurisdiction to com.
mlt tie defendant, and second, was