The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1896-06-21

on the LIST day of March, 1896, Mr..
Harry Hynds Of Salt Lake city, upon
returning from a trip TO Butte, went to
his house on Brigham street at about
10 o'clock in the morning, and finding
the door locked. raped and was ad-
mitted by his wife, who was in her
night dress. She greeted him with a
kiss, and after a few words, he pro-
posed 10 take a bath and with her
went into the bedroom and began dis
robing. The bed had the appearance
of having been occupied by two per-
sons and there were two beer glasses
and a bottle under the bed. A broken
package Of cigarettes were upon
chair and half-smoked cigarettes were
upon the floor Mrs. Hynds explained
those matters, but Hynds, on going TO
his sa1chel for some things, saw her
drawing the portiere curtains of a clos
ct He made inquiry as to what she
was doing and she replied that she was
getting a dress. Hynds Went there and
found Walter Dinwoodey. 4 young
man, a member OF an old and respect
ed family, partly dressed, crouching in
the corner Hyrds ran for the colored
servant, putting his revolver in his
pocket at the same time. The atten-
ton IF the servant was called to Din
woodey. HyEds was in great passion
and called loudly for his wife and Dim
woodey to leave the house. The lat
ter was dressing, and said to Mrs.
Hynds: Come with me, Maud; will
take care of you" Hynds then whirled
and fired three shots, killing Din
woodey. Hynds was charged with muir
der in the first degree. His trial COM
menced Monday, June l, and ended on
Saturday morning at o'clnck, June 6,
with a verdict of not guilty. He was
prosecuted by County Attorney Whit
temore and John n. Zane. He was de-
Tended by Powers, Straup and Lipp-
man. Great public interest was excited
and The Herald presents herewith the
stenogra phic report made by John
Pike. court reporter, of the argument
of Judge O. W. Powers, for the defend
ant.
ARGUMENT OF JUDGE POWERS
FOR THE DEFENSE.
If Your Honor please, and Gentle
men of the Jury: Did you ever stop
to think of the difference between a
civil case, when property rights are in
controversy and a criminal case, when
life or liberty is at stake. In the one
IT is a mere contention concerning
that which, if a man loses. he may yet
regain. The other is a question SUBJ
r11itted to a, jury as to whether the
law shall reach out its hand and take
that which the law cannot give. take
that which comes from God himself,
the life Of the individual Consider
ing the distinction between the two,
YOU at once perceive the difference in
gravity, you ait once understand the
great responsibility that rests upon the
citizen when he is selected by the state
90 determine question of life or lib
erty
The oath that you take as jurors in
a civil case merely binds you to try
the issues Joined and a true verdict
render between the individuals; the
oath that you take in q. criminal case,
the oath that you have taken in this
case, is to the effect that you will not
only well and truly try the cause, but
that you will true deliverance make be-
tween the state and the defendant at
the bar. The state has no desire. what
ever may be the desire of those whom
the law permits to speak for the state,
to do an injustice TO the meanest of
Gods creatures. The law is tender OF
human rights The law knows no dis
tinufion Of individuals. The law pre-
sumes every man placed on trial TO be
an innocent man; it requires that all
the elements that go TO make up the
offense charged against him, shall be
proved by the state, not merely by a
preponderance Of the evidence, as in
a civil case, but upon the conscience
and upon the oaths of the jurors, be-
yond a reasonable doubt. I ask Of you,
in the consideration of what few re-
marks ] shall make, and in the con-
ssderation Of the testimony, when you
shall go to your jury room. that you
viii bear constantly in mind the re-
gponsibility that rests upon you as jul
rors called to determine the very high
est question that man can determine
You are called, in this case, to deter
mine the question as to whether this
mans life shall be surrendered to the
law. or whether, under all the circum-
stances, the killing in this case was JUS
tifiable horaicide. 1t is q grave cues
ton. and ] wonder not that citizens
hesitate. I wonder not that they do
NOT like to have imposed upon them
the burden of jury service in cases ike
this for a, man may well feel that,
though he DO the best he may, he can
but grope along, and if he do an inius-
tice, the consequences are so great