Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1897-05-24
AROUND THE COURTS
Richard Harvey on Trial for
Burglary.
BEFORE JURY IN NoRRELUs COURT
Motion 10 Instruct Jury 10 Return
Verdict of AcquItial Overrul,d-
More JurOrs--Oiher Matters.

Richard Harvey is being tried before
a jury In Judge NorreIl's court today
on the charge OF burglary. Assistant
County Attorney Putnam appears ior
the State and Attorneys w. I. Gunter
and George N. Lawrence Tor the de-
fendant,
The Information charges Harvey
with having on the night Of the 4th Of
April, 1897, unIawfully, forcibiy, felon'
iously anu burglariously did enter the
store OF Rogers and 6tringhsm ut 40
East Temple street and stealing three
dozen silk ties valued at $40, one mans
suit OF underwear OF tue value OF 81 .5O
and one shirt valued at sl.50.
The names of the Jurors trying the
case are as follows:
Joseph Baumgarlen, Pe!er G. He'll
man, 6malos Jackson, Samuel Allen,
p. IL. Riley, q. A. Larsen, Stephen
Tucker, Charles L1ngson.
The first witness called was Orson
Rogers. senior member OF the firm Of
Rogers & 5tringham, who testified
that he and his partner, Henry String.
ham, rented rooms in the building
known Ms 40 East Temple street. Mr..
GuDter objected to the introduction OF
| testimony regarding any rooms and
Insisting that 1t rested upon the prose-
| cution to prove that the uefen dRnt
| broke and entered tue building desig-
| mated In the information.
| Mr.. Putnam argued that o man en-
tered house by the front door--even
though IL be open--ant made f0rcible
| entrance into any room In that house,
was guilty OF burglary. The court
overfuied The objection.
Mr.. Rogers then went on to say that
he anu mia partner rented rooms and
| 8 in the Hocpei-E ldredge building ami
| that on the morning OF the 9th OF
april he discovered that nm entrance
10 the rooms had been effsci,d
through the back WINDOW, which
was reached by means OF get
ting on TO the roof Of
an adjoining building. He stated also
that tie conditions in which he found
the rooms and told OF what was miss.
ing, VIE. a suit OF underwear, a black
satin shirt, silk handkerchief, pair of
pants, suspendeIs and iour-ln.
hand tie, all of which were in
troduced In evidence ana iden-
tilted by tue witness. Ho Identified
also the handkerchief and underwear
as sample goods sent his firm. The
tie he recognized as the personal
property OF Mr.. Biringhnm.
| PJiice officer Richard l.. Shannon
l taat Al nj l..f.
ceived at headquarters on Monday
morning, April 5lh, ne went to Il Igefs
and Stringham's rooms aud got list . 1
the stolen goods. He saw defendant on
the evening OF the same day enter the
second hand store OF Ingham and
Howard at 240 south State Dtreet.
Deiendont remained there for ten min
ntes. He wore all the articles intro.
duceu 10 evidence. Asked defendant
where he got the articles anu his
answer was that he got them from a
fellow ledger. He did not know the
maI's name anu he lodged at no place
In particular, but ut random. Witness
had another cnnversation with defen.
dapt the next morning at the city Jail
wnen he gave description OF the man
he claimed to have got the goods from.
| a Charles Inghaman / en- iffeu Haryey
an the man who had been iu his store.
Witness could not remember the date
but was positive some time ago the de.
tondent came about half pas,
seven In the evening and wanted to
dispose OF some elk handkerchiefs and
ladies' underwear. He told defendant
TO call In again about 8 O'Clock. Deien
dant never came baca. He did not
remember ever having seen the defen.
dant before, but was positive deien.
dant was the man who offered the
goods TO him for sale. There were
other articles he ofieiei to dispose OF,
but what they were witn,ss had
for otten. Defendant told witness
that he got them from friend In
Denver.
| w. ID. Howard, EInglhama partner,
testi fl d to the same facts. ii diun't buy
the articles because he didn't handle
that hind OF goods.
Officer Shannon was recalled by the
deienae and In answer to Attornsy
Gunter said that he once arrested two
men named Jacobson Bowman for
turgiarizing the same 9TH ces. 1t was
about Two or three months age.
Both the prosecution and defense
here rested, when Attorney Gunter
moved that the court instruct the Jury
to return verdict OF acqui,tal for two
reasons, the first VI which was because
thu prosecution had failed TO prove the
ownership OF the building whore the
feDDery Is alleged TO have been COM
mitteu, and because the Information
ale geu braaking into building,
whereas the evidence went to show