The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1895-11-13
HAGUE CASE NOW ON.
1T PROMISES TO CREATE A BIG
SENSATION.
Judge Marshall Makes the Opening
Statement, and Outlines What the
Prosecution Expects to Prove.

Hague came up in the First district
court.
United States Prosecuting Attorney
Judd and Special United States Coun-
sci John A Marshall appeared for the
government, end Brown & Henderson,
Samuel A. King and w. n. Duseh-
berry for the defendant.
Mr.. Hague is charged with making a
false entry in the general balance DOCK
of the First National Bank of Nephi,
while cashier of said bank, on the ora
day of January 1894 with intent 10
defraud the, bank and deceive any
agent who might be appointed by the
comptroller of the treasury to examine
the affairs of the bank. contrary 10 the
national bank act.
The alleged false entry is one Whlch
makes it appear that Ingram Bros.
received S575, for which they gave
their promissory note, when, III Iact'
Ingram Bros. had received no money
and had not given their note.
When Judge Merritt asked If the at
torneys were ready for trial Mr.. Brown
stated that they were not and would
ask for a continuance. He then read
an affidavit from defendant to the
effect that defendant had asked to
examine the books of the bank for the
purpose of explaining the charge upon
which the indictment is based. and
had been refused, and that it was
necessary for his counsel to have an
opportunity of examining the books
for purposes of cross-examination:
that his counsel had not been able to
examine the files in the case for the
reason that they had not been kept in
the office of the clerk of the court,
but had been in the custody of United
States Prosecuting Attorney Judd; and
that he could not safely proceed to
trial without the presence of Zeph
Hill, of Denver, Colo, United States
bank examiner. who would testify that
the item in question did not deceive
him.
Mr. Brown also presented an affida,
Wit setting forth that he had not been
able to examine the files in the case.
Mr.. Brown asked that Bank Examiner
Hill be brought here by the govern
ment.
Judge Marshall and District Attor
ney Judd opposed the continuance.
They claimed that the defense had had
certified copies of the indictments and
that they had no power to bring Bank
Examiner Hill here.
Judge Henderson called attention to
the fact that the defense had not been
permitted to examine the books Of the
bank, and asked that the case be not
tried until such an opportunity was
afforded them.
The Jury.
The motion for continuance was
overruled and the following jury i'm
panneled tc try the case:
Thomas Beesley, ]. e. Cheever,
George Ball, Provo; Thomas H. Beck,
Eureka; William Brown, Heber; Will
liam Van Ansdal, John B. Linander,
Santaquin; D. Z. Sargent, Payson; w.
F. Wiscomb, Nephi Straw. Alonzo
Clark, Springville; Isaac O. Wall,
Wallsburg.
The Opening Statement.
Judge Marshall made the opening
statement. The government would show
that the Ingram note endorsed by w.
l. Brown was not signed by Ingram
Bros. and endorsed by Brown,
but had been signed by Hague
in disguised hand. They
would also show that in January,
1894. while Mr.. Hague was a member
of the legislature, Mr.. Whitmore, the
president of the bank, went into the
bank to take charge of its affairs. He
had discovered that something was
wrong and had sent for Mr.. Hague to
When he came down he had acknowl-
edged that this note, together with
others, was fictitious, and had ac-
knoWledged that he had embezzled
funds of the bank; land since that
time" said Judge Marshall, when in
conversation with the bank officials,
he had never denied his guilt"
This remark was objected to by Mr..
Brown and the objection overruled.
Mr.. Brown then objected to Judge
Marshall appearing in the case. Mr.
Marshall was sworn and testified that
he had been employed by the attor-
ney-general, through District Attorney
Judd, and by letter from the attorney
general. The objection was oVerruled
and an exception taken.
Mr.. Brown then stated that under
the statutes no offense had been made
to which the Indictment was applica-
BILE. The indictment charged making a
false entry. If the Ingram note was
genuine, the entry was correct, and
there was no allegation in the indict-
ment that the note was forged or that
any note had been received at all He
held that under the statute the indict-
ment must charge forgery if it was in
tended to prove that the note was
forged.
Judge Marshall replied that the entry
was made by Mr. Hague, he knowing
that. the note was forged, and that
this made the entry false, just as it
would have been if there was no note.
The objection was overruled and wit
nesSeS were called for the prosecution.
Other Gases.
There are three other cases of the
United States VS.. Hague set for trial
this term. Although some twelve or
thirteen indictment have been found
against Mr.. Hague, charging him with
misappropriating funds of the bank in
large sum-some $25, G00-several OF
them, however, were quashed at pre-
vious term of court for the reason that
District Attorney Judd had, upon in
struction of the United States attor-
ney-general, taken the stenographer of
the court into the grand jury room for
the purpose Of taking notes of the evil
dence, which was contrary to the
statutes of the territory.
The case promises to be an interest
ing one for the reason that each side
is determined that no point OF law that
is favorable to it shall be overlooked
other Court Business.
Arin Helgerson VS.. Daniel King, jr.,
ct al; decree of foreclosure and judg-
ment for $407.l $50 costs and attor-
ney's fees
In the case of j. w. Scott VS.. Provo
city; brought in a sealed verdict this
morning awarding plaintiff S26S.50
thirty days stay of execution and time
to prepare and file statement on mo-
ton for a new trial was granted
Joseph A. Thomas. of Lehi. was ex-
cused as foreman of the grand jury
on account of important personal bust
ness. Joseph Ovard was appointed