Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1895-04-05
RITCHIE FINED $IOO
70; The Criminal Libel ypjl Frank
E. hCGgTf.1.
a Nlw TRIAL was DENIED mil


-liA vas The morning cot Tor the
iaaslug q seltcncU upon Attorney
Lnof D.. lyt1hiu, convicted r.,en'lJ
100 70 charge o. ormiually hbclius
Fuus o.. sia3Iruu, 90 his csp~eity OF
uf,id.1i uf tls sslt Lake building s.
loan Is islcAti1u.
Hhsu Judge Blflch took his 80. on
u.ulI % tuo Third District cou.t
%, .eH O'Clock tho defendant AMI bis
al.rauJt, Ge1ryc sutherland aud
Judge Bonnet, grro 0u hhu-. Auol-
uay Sutherland ul once interpreted
.u.ul boo arrest ui Judgment F1d mo-
nHu .H, new tnll, aud l,a.Cd the
muuI. u.ou which these were baas4.
.I.uug,G Iuu court TO rut aisle th1
verdict and rraut now trlri OH i1ur
HHUlntU Euuids-iHi, tua, the court
u.H.IT,Cir4 Sue lIfy 900 matters Of luWi
Goa. tuu yIur. yrrsu iu thU decision
.. VuH.Iu. ui jaw HrHlus uuriuE iHu
"Hu.ru .. Goo iua, D., 'hat the vrr'les
10 900" july wa H.usrAfy 90 tue Ia"
.UI ugt uHu., q. lUal go iIry Hcr1
sH.tg .i Wug.usua,, ly which Tar
aHH ulU IH.ful-siUu ul Tue case WHd
HrusuItas. tHI.lI made HifIus
HI.It .' s uuI.aIu HlUCI ui Information
HH.au lsI reached tho duiu's u -luuh
lH. uHHr NHH hll bHiIfu 'ur ,IIri,
IUaWuH iIntHHmr % tnu Jury, VIII itlhu
lI.I "aH lu ulYErr b., wu.t iutu thn
90 I.rc uuH HTuH uv hui, WHO
.a. Y.lulH.I.u %. 'lr C9ufi,
I..s uTA I."t|Iu behind the lutiuf
..atH .tHm where .fttdItlu emu some
HIH WtuJ4'ts claimed 10 have auuu
. I...IU ruEUG Che luuliug AMI ,shl
.HH .huu.lyU circulars. hIvilG doua
lHIH fHu Jurors made certain tNltfi-
] W.HiH ul4uluuaih the Hight % Dfucf 90
] 900 boa iHHt Ui tuu matter Council
added ilnf Gee hAI not been able 90
| yurly tui., but hu offered the slate
mul. uy way NJ explanation.
7 JuaEv bhuCh- ruUu you DO not
H.HHI 900 tGpt now
] Attorney sutherland fopllei In tho
negative.
judge HaftcH- Because 10 that were
really I'D DO would br sufficient gtDunI
90 moving .0F u new trial.
Attorney sutherland tnii he had
l..HI VITA some % tho Jurors, tus
iHrY refused afterwards u statu any
.uHs about the matter He wuuiI
have ufUu glad 90 have called one %
GOO lurBu, at lraff, 10 tho witness
sauI aud question ham Ia references ~
iuu mauCs luu principal ground,
aided HG Sutherland, winch hu
uIU uisuI 1r tao granting ot a now
iuni was tlut tur indictment diI not
state facts sufficient Go constitute %
public offence. La other words, there
was no lIuul contained ia the circular
| which formed tlu basis OF the iudirt-
| mrlL Counsel quoted from the cifcu-
IHr lu question uui douIvi that 70
could hu construed a. meaning that
! NHaufTlu uuI hin colleagues mishp-
|IgIUflatuI tho funds " tho assuClatlUu,
1900 Uuiy inigrgucu was that u had been
o. IhIIu. concern anu EuiuV down hill.
lIu cited u number uf luFnl authorities,
ruHyIlal VARIOUS gIfuIus OF tlr trrt..
uIuy uul Insisted that tue cFimB
charged against liiluulg HAI uut been
established
! Sic sutherland tuu r.matEci that
Hu uusTtyui Me Bg.urs., 0ur o. tho
|laIHu puIu tur tual l. liItUuir, wEs
IH tuu courtroom, ami usNud pulmlt-
sion o. cali him.
| JlI.o Battul asssutgi ani tho
|IuIf WyEt uH9u thc witness stand;
boz AHIaiaut ID uIu. 4-usrury
lIWut objected % LIs buiug sworn
iHf tln pIrpuss 70 las ua1hiug tAo yog.
alu.u' tho Jury, rlls, hr saiu, could
only lu touu whore tho verdict had
bHuI reached by uuRuur--payluga
gains 10 CAri1 or ailus Its A. o.
whether or not shu accused Hnuul br
u.-uauu rcd guilty. The suyfem .
cHuf' ui idaH" hgu Ju1t dUGiluu that
question, an H--,u.r % tlls gufTl.
Guy buI tuat Oh. CALIFORNIA; gur. also
aIso tnUfuUu. JutEu Howst cited
UAHH1 q rapport ut hiH contention.
s tlfuvy Sutherland, la roply, said
tiur3 was co lIct a. gutfuIl uu
this r1iut II the ruIu laIu down lu the
lgAhD raau was 30 h.ig4TuoI out very
Huat ltlustieo mi At ali.w, Ila
. juror wa ugi put upon tao stand now
Q 30 hrW what elect 500 Hlrp winch tuu
] lazy took la 81 'ug 90 Tue poet. Nice bad
] uYIn tuu ygr iCii but 90 augW t.u.t tue
act ifsulf was done.
Judge H1watH,il commended, under
3 the rlasusu u this Territory, that thu
ID 'uIlict 70. the Jury gOllI ust be im.
, pe.ulUl uy the Uill1gvit OF any jugor.
, Wd 90 ghu jurors t,siIisOuy on tu5
10 sll W.. only anu hes way Of obtain,
/. logan rWIaylL
d JuIny Etr.gu said boo hlusulf mrdl
b. au examination into sim az question
come ume t.L. lu that case, h1WeyuF
Do 300 uH,ul 'uB tlmTIy ns 90 what uu,
d O. ffcI ln tht Jury ,u1m and not no o.
d overt .es Uutil IT, Ills hunui
4. uIl we'd the wIlurss 90 answer.
tls Barnett wa iuUu QIrFtl nod los
4. / Attorney sutherland No 20 whether Nj
/. uu5 tsu tuuu. thu tfui any OF tut
i. I.uwrrtu uia Euowlgl- .,yuigg.. tsopgst
uUI.y.
. Witness STATED that when ba nimRvl
, wort thee o. fetch his riail Lu VIZ.
/. .tgumrguiHu Oy jurors W. n. smlt:.
l' taalyihi aud George Run. Tut,
took Iruu-ufunvHtH 90 ascertain tu,
distances 20 whluu kitchie, l.rGufrlf
su1 aurs were ru posed TO hay.
.r r.u l,gut slalo other experiments.
"l Vl a-k you wugtpfr before Ga,
Case was t-bmltter CO. t.u larry yot
HmmuuIgyIg' Go tue other Jlruf4 tlI
.I RESULT W your mui lrvm1ph2 D.uu'
+. 10 RON Juror Dybufre''
"i uiluT tuh Nr, DybaTy but
beard tny other t,'o 40 sU, and 4 tnluI
fNrg tu.Wes1si 20 ham % 40 u1wI
auIr. TINS wasGtrr some OF the tus
.mluy w,siu. I could not uulerslarI
700 .uu VI tho tu-llmUny VERY well uy
go no and that YVES why | went down.
Z. Judge Huwat then Tbplisi l. tpt
10 .IIun made by Attorney SuthuTIau
Continued 0" 4ags Fi,s,J