The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1894-12-07

| The sensation Of the hour is the ar
rest and conmittal Of City Marshal
Pratt, Detective Sheets and Desk Ser
seant Ferguson for contempt of court
Public opinion on the merits Of the case
! is divided. Some take the ground thai
the police officers are justified in their
refusal to disclose the names which
] they have withheld from the grand
jury; others contend that as a criminal
charge has been preferred and they are
| in possession of information demanded
by the grand jury, they are III duty
bound as citizens and as public of1iceeR
to disclose what they know
/ The particulars of the case on which
this whole matter turns are of a very
idisgraceful character. and it is said
involve the guilt and the reputation OF
| a wife and mother. whose name is
known to the officers and which they
have agreed and are determined to sup
press.
| It Is probable that by keeping secret
the names of the alleged guilty persons
much trouble will be avoided, a public
scandal will be prevented, there will be
a possibility of reform and social saliva
ton for the woman. who if exposed,
would be ruined in reputation and her
family disgraced. with the danger OF
bloodshed at the hands of an out
ragged husband.
Many people will be likely to say.
on these representations, the. officers are
81, ~, a.
names demanded. If they were merely
private citizens there would be more
reason for taking this view than now
appears. But they are public officers.
They have been required by the grand
jury to give evidence in the case. They
do not refuse to state what they know
of the particulars, but they do refuse to
give the woman's name, which they do
not deny they are acquainted with.
When the court decides they must an
swer and they still refuse. of course
they are clearly in contempt.
The wrong commenced by giving the
salacious particulars to the press. If
the Marshal had decided to let the
woman go and keep her name from the
public. the whole affair ought to have
been kept secret Mercy, good policy,
the best good of the parties and of the
public. prompted the first action of the
Marshal, no doubt. But, legally, what
discretion is invested ina police officer
to let a criminal go who has been ar
rested? Is he Judge. jury. attorney and
all?
Admitting that this was a case in
which, even if the public had been
made aware of the whole circumstances
they would have approved of what the
Marshal did as matter of moral good,
when. through the partial disclosure of
the affair for publication it was agi-
tated until it came before the grand
jury, was it not then the duty of the
officers summoned before that body to
have answered the questions which
were legally propounded to them?
The grand jury is secret body. The
secret could as well be kept by its mem
bers as by the three officers who held
it. They constituted a legal inquisition,
which the officers did not, to use dis
erection and determine whether it would
be to the public interest to find bill
of indictment or ignore the charge. It
is probable that under the promise
made to the woman to preserve her
secret, and after learning that the evil
dence was as weak as the Marshal
claims it to be, the whole affair would
have remained as it was before it came
to the grand jury, and in shora time
would have faded from the public
memory
We do not wish to say word to
PREJUDICE the action to be taken today,
when the case comes up again before
the court. We only speak in reference
to what has been done. AS men, the
officers acted on their manhood in keep
ing their promise to the compromised
woman. But the law cannot be evaded
nor can the courts be defied And as
public officers, sworn to uphold and
the law, they are placed in a
position which involves something more
than their personality.
AS we understand it, the case has
been brought before the grand jury in
such a way that they were bound to
entertain it. And though the prosecut-
ing attorney is the officer VINO, under
the law, questions witnesses before
that body and represented it in court,
the complaint came from other sources
and there has been a demand for an
investigation.
If the prurient details Of the case had
NOT been made nrhIjc thara would ,oro
badly have been no trouble about the
matter. As it is, the whole affair is
reopened, and it will remain now with
the court and the grand jury to say
what shall be the denoument. If justice
can be subserved and the public welfare
will permit. it will be a good thingito
bury the whole case for good and ALL