The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1896-08-05

to the conclusion that the ups and
downs of the Rocky mountain sport
are simply-well'
So spake one of the interested par
ties in the Thompson-Carter matter,
after Justice Wenger had held Bob
Thompson in bonds in the sum of 81,
500 to answer to the district court for
the killing of James Carter yesterday
morning.
Yesterday forenoon was devoted to
hearing the arguments of counsel for
the prosecution and defense, as an
nounced would be the case in the is
SIZE Of The Herald of that date. And
while generally speaking arguments
Of counsel do not make the most in
teresting reading, those of yesterday
were all right. Mr. Waite, represent
ing the county and Mr.. Strdup for
the defense made excellent speeches
and the latter especially distinguished
himself by going after the assistant
states attorney and giving him a dose
of forensic drubbing, which, had 1t
been delivered in the same manner as
Thompson's blows, physically, in
stead of vocally, would have resulted
in making him party defendant to
a suit similar TO the one, the first
chapter of which ended yesterday.
Mr.. Waite however. was amply able
to take care of himself, and conducted
his side of the case with marked
ability
Mr.. Waite made a few assertions
in the course of his address to the
court which gave counsel for the de-
Tense an opportunity of getting in,
pugilistically speaking, to his short
ribs, and he did so. StTaup's speech
10 If
might have been termed a barbecue,
for 1T certainly was a roast; there are
those who would class it as a scorch-
ing, and who would intimate thai the
services of a fire department We're
necessary; some people would have
said, had they heard it, that Straup
was poking fun at the able gentleman
who conducted the trial, or hearing,
for the state, but be it as it may 1t
pleased the spectators, caused the
court to smile underneath the Ma
poleon III mouStache which covers MS
dentriculated orifice and made Fred
erick Garfield Waite Vince, and Vince
hard.
The cour+ room was as thoroughly
crowded as it was on the day pre-
vious, the interest in the arguments
seemingly being as intense as was
that manifested in the evidence. AS
is we'll known, the matter at point
was the arguing of the motion of the
defense thar the defendant be dis
missed.
The court having propounded the
question which is used alike in the
court room and the foot race, the duel
and the swimming match. Gentle
men. are you ready?" and both sides
having asserted that they were and
considerable in addition, Mr.. Waite
arose and in a few remarks said thai
while there was apparently lacking in
this matter all the essential elements
of crime; that there was no nance
shown by the defendant, or by the
deceased in the commission of the act;
still he believed, III his own mind.
that if the matter was pushed in
court Of Justice where a jury could
hear and determine the evidence;
where a learned trial judge could pre-
side. that the defendant would be con-
victed Of involuntary manslaughter
at least.
The above comprises about all that
Mr.. Waite. said in his brief opening;
in fact it is what he would term the
syllabus" of his speech.
MIR. Straup feliciSated himself that
the states attorney took such a
broad view of the matter and s1noled
a smile of deep and profound salts
faction. This smile was interrupted
by the court. who took occasion to
say that while the complaint charged
the defendant with murder, OF course
it included the lesser grades of crime,
under the statute, something no one
present volunteered to dispute.
The court, assuming an easy position
signalled the defense to go ahead,
whereat Mr.. Straup piled his law books
in such shane as to enable him TO get
ouick action when he wished to Illus
tra:e. and began. He opened by stat
ing that as a matter of fact no venlre
had been proven: that the ASSISTANT
county attorney had omitted to prove
by any witness that the alleged oifense
took place in this city, county or state,
hut that he was not disposed to argue
that point, although he had right
to press the technicality, for such II
was, if he chose. Laying the matter
of venire aside, the only question is:
was this a prize fight or a boxing ex-
hibition or sparring match?"
A prize fight said counsel, must be
conducted in public. That is an essen
tial feature If the prize fight is not
carried on in public it is something
else In support of this declaration,
which. by the way, caused Mr.. Waite
to open his peppers somewhat wider
than usual, Mr.. Straup produced a large
volume. bound in calf, from which he
cited a decision of the supreme court
of the state of Mississippi in the APP
neal of the renowned John L. Sullivan,
In which the court laid down this prin-
cis,le: This was not a prize fight be-
cause II was not carried on in public.
No evidence was evinced to show that
any but club members and their
friends were there; in fact, from the
testimony itself it would appear that
there were not more than half dozen
people present.
Further arguing on the point that it
was no. prize fight, counsel cited the
decision Of the supreme court of the
state of Louisiana, in the matter of the
celebrated case where the state sought
to revoke the charter OF the Olympic
club. because it had permitted Sullivan
and Corbett to fight there. The court,
after hearing the testimony of several
newspaper men, decided that the en-
counter was not a prize fight, but q
boxing contest for points where skill
and endurance were the requisite quail
ties, and refused TO revoke the char
ter.
A Michigan case was also cited, where
the supreme court reversed the ruling
OF a trial court and remanded back for
.-... the cause, whore man was con-
yicted Of prize fighting, whenA as q
matter of fact. he had engaged only
IN glove contest
With the authorities alluded to, the
counsel went on to demonstrate that in
asrnuch as this contest was conducted
in private, as was the contes. in " hich