Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1896-12-28
MORRIS CASE AGAIN.
Another Echo oil Tho Celebrated
Bribery Charges.
Contends That The Slalo,Iia Exhausted
Its Right 10 Pfoasculo-The
Arguments.

The rehearing OF the celebrated
Norris bribery case began in the GRIM
inal division OF the Third district
court before Judge Rolapp this morn
ing.
The court room was well filled with
spectators and a number OF attorneys
were present when the cass was called.
The defendant entered the court
room at 10 o'clock, accompanied by
his attorneys, Judges Powers and
EOoibturow.
The State is represented by County
Attorney Whittemore and Judge
Rhodes OF Sanpete county.
Judge Rolapp had come down from
Ogden this morning to try,the case ami
was on the bench when the clock
struck ten.
sis counsel ready to proceed with
the Morris caes," asked the court?
ave are, your honor" replied
Judge Powers, "and we desire to be
heard on u motion, later on, which, In
effect Will be: that there Is no law
III horlzing the liking of the term Of
court or for the empsnelliDg OF
juries."
Judge Looibourow moved for
dismissal OF the case pleading
former acquittai and once III
jeopardy. he reviewed, at length, the
hist0ry OF the case, charging the wsn
OF d!llyent prosecution on the part Of
the county attorney. II was shown
that Norris was indicted for bribery by
tue grand jury during the September
OF 1896; tried the following March and
acquitted. The defendant was indicted
again In May on u similar charge and
acquitted. In November last he was
indicted and tried Tor the third time
resulting In disagreement of the
jury or, as Judge Lool borrow put Il
"mlH-tIial," The defenss was ready
To proceed right then anditheTe with
rehearing, but as personal favor TO the
prosecution they conaepted to a CON-
iinusnce. Juuge Laoibourow gave
numerous citations in support OF hit
motion, and contended that the Stale
had exhausted ils right to proceed, 50
lar rs the prosecution OF this specific
case went. Counsel thought an apol-
ogy was due the court, Tor not having
it's attention called to these state Of
facts al the last hearing.
AT the conclusion OF counsel'A argu.
ment recess was taken until 2
O'Clock.
On tho recOnvenipg OF curt this
afternoon, Judge Looiboufow contin.
ued his argumentF, after which Judge
Rhodes arose anu said that without
pretending to MAKE an argument on
the points OF law advanced by tbt
defense, which YVES nil good law, bul
which had no bearing upon the case
In issue. To ask the court to pass upon
the pleas Of "once In jeopardy" or
former scquittsl, were clearly set
forth In our form OF pleading
as matters for the Jury to decide.
10 ask the court 10 grant this motion,
would be to request reversal OF POSI-
tions taken At former trials, ami like
wise to reverse instructions given
jurors. "rhere has moi" continued
counsel "been one reason given why
the court should reverse itself"
Judge R1lspp-I snail do nothing
until the case gets to the jury. Let
the Jurors be called.
Judge Powers objected to the EN-
paneling OF jurors, first for the
reason that there Is no law la the
State Of Utah authorizing the court
calling any body iGto court, second,
that there II no law authorizing or pro.
Wiling for the summoning or the
drawing OF any grand or petit jurors,
anu the persons here summoned are
not Jurors but bystan1ers. Judge
Powers then proceeded to give his.
tory Of the bills in the house and sen.
ate, providing for the drawing Of
Jurors, claiming II was never passed by
the Legislature and quoting Judge
Bsrtch's opinion In the recent cleo.
ton decision.
Judge Rhodes said he was not going
to urge that the objections raised by
Judge Powers were not tenable, but
! on the other hand thought they were
entitled to consideration.
Judge R1lapp--It seems to me that
| II what Judge Powers has lust read
can be proven to be true, We have been
proceeding in vain Tor the ipast year.
A recess Of fifteen minutes was
taken at press time to give the court
and prosecution az opportunity 10 LOOK
up authorities.