The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1896-11-29
Prosecution Closes and the De-
Tense Opens Its Side.
VALUE OF THE FURNITURE
EXPERT WITNESSES GIVE THEIR
VIEWS on THE SUBJECT.
Those For the Prosecution Think 1t
Was Worth Only S2G,6S7, While
Those For the Defense Claim Its
Fair and Reasonable Value Was
S54,073.

Yesterdays proceedings in the Nor
ris bribery case were tedious and I'M
/ interesting, consisting in great part of
I the examination of expert witnesses
for the prosecution in regard to the
value of the furniture and in the read
ing of dispositions made by Chicago ex-
perts on behalf of the defense, also in
reference to the value of the furniture.
The proceedings opened by the pros
ecution recalling Martin Hayken for
the purpose of proving that A. II. An
drews x Co. were, at the time of the
alleged bribery, a corporation.
Judge Powers objected to the witness
answering the question on the ground
that it would simply be the conclusion
of the witness and therefore not COM
petent evidence. The Indictment stated
that A. H. Andrews & Co. was a cor
poration, and it was therefore incum-
bent on the prosecution to prove the
allegation by competent testimony. The
best evidence that it was a corporation
would be the certificate of incorpora-
ton, which it was quite possible for
the prosecution to produce. The point
was argued at considerable length by
Judges Powers and Loofbourow in sup
port of the objection, and by County
Attorney Whittemore and Judge
Rhodes against it.
Judge Rolapp overruled the objection
if Mr.. Whittemore would put his ques-
tons in proper form. Mr.. Whittemore
began over again and ELECTED the fact
that Andrews & Co. was a corporation,
and did business here as such.
VALUE OF THE FURNITURE.
H D. Folsom testified that the fair
value of the stationary portion of the
frrr ifrr,e
H. J. Hayward of the Salt Lake
Building & Manufacturing company
had made. a careful valuation of the
stationary furniture and agreed with
the previous witness that it was worth
81, S9O.95.
Elias Morris was called next and tes-
titled that the marble and panel work
was fairly worth $S.S7109. On motion
of Judge Powers, Morris testimony
was stricken out for the reason that
marble was not furniture and furni-
ture only was mentioned in the indict-
ment.
w. c. Kinnersley, an employee of the
Dinwoodey Furniture company, said
he had made an appraisement of the
movable portion of the furniture in the
county's portion of the city and county
building, and that a fair and reason
able value of the same was S14, 76909
This closed the case for the prosecu-
ton.
THE DEFENSE OPENS
Judge P wers then moved that the
jury be instructed to return a verdict
of not guilty for the reason that the
only testimony tending to prove that
Norris had agreed to accept a bride |
was given by Martin Hayken, an ac-
complete to the alleged fraudulent |
agreement and the statute required |
that no man could be convicted solely /
on the evidence of an accomplice: also !
for the reason that Morris had already 1
been tried and acquitted on practically |
the same charge.
Judge Rolapp overruled the motion |
and Judge Powers, with a view of /
showing to the jury that Morris had |
already been tried and acquitted for |
the act he is now being tried for. read !
a portion of the testimony given at the |
previous trial going to show that the
state of facts relied on then was sub
stantially the same as those put for
ward now.
Judge Loofbourow then read deposit
lions made by George P. Caney, F. A.
Holbrook. F. o. Bauman, w F. Hears
ley, H. c. Fricke and Mr. Crosby to
show that the furniture was worth the
S54.973.S5 charged for it, and to com
bat the assertions of the experts ex-
amined who testified that it was worth
only s266S7.O4
The reading of these dispositions oc-
cuDied the time till the hour of ad-
joUrnment, and court adjourned till
Monday morning