The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1897-03-26
ATTORNEY AND JUSTICE.
Mr.. Murphy Fined S25 For Con-
tempt of Court.

Attorney John H. Murphy and Justice
of the Peace Margetts had little mis-
understanding yesterday, which re
suited in the former being fined s25
for contempt of the Justices court.
A short time ago a case was tried
before Justice Margetts in which j. r.
Smith was plaintiff and Robert Bridge
defendant, and Mr.. Murphy was coun-
sci for the latter.
The case involved the ownership of
a dog which both parties claimed. The
testimony was very conflicting, Il wit
nesses testifying that the animal be-
longed to the plaintiff. and 10 that it
was the defendants dog. The court,
after taking the case under Amusement
for several days, found the issues for
the plaintiff, and taxed the costs,
amounting to $25, to the defendant. Mr..
Murphy then moved the court to grant
a new trial. and it was after this mo-
ton had been argued and overruled
that the unpleasantness occurred.
Mr.. Murphy, the court held, made re-
marks rejecting on the integrity of
the court in regard to the decision rem
dered, and did so while the court was
in session, and his honor, to uphold the
dignity of the court, imposed the fine
and ordered the attorney committed
Until it was paid. and Mr.. Murphy at
once wrote check for the amount.
MR. MURPHY'S SIDE.
Mr.. Murphy's side of the story is
that when Justice MargettS had the
case under consideration his honor told
him that he would render a decision on
a certain dav at a certain hour, and
requested that Mr.. Murphy be present.
Shortly after this statement by Mar
gets, Murphy learned that the justice
L. :.
of the plaintiff, and the latter'S attor-
ney presented cost bill to Mr.. Murphy
two days before the time fixed by the
justice for rendering the Judgment
Murphy was greatly surprised at this
and asked Margetts for an explanation,
and. he says the justice admitted that
he had told the plaintiff that he was
going to render judgment in his favor,
and Margetts then said that the testi-
mony was so conflicting that he had
great difficulty in coming to a decision
and his honor. Mr. Murphy says, sug-
gested that a new trial be had before
a jury. and at the same time stated
that if Murphy would make such a
motion he would grant it. as he
thought if would be proper to have a
rehearing.
The attorney then Sade the motion
as suggested by the court, and was
I1uCn SURPRISED MHeI IL WAS ON6TIuleQ.
Murphy says he was not satisfied with
the treatment accorded him, and being
under the impression that the court
had adjourned, he called the justice
into an adjoining room and there in
formed his honor that he had no conf
dence in him and requested that he
grant a change of venue in some other
cases which Mr.. Murphy has pending
in that court At this both parties
became considerably angered and Muir
ply intercepted Margetts for a moment
as the latter passed back into the room
and took his seat on the bench again.
Mr. Murphy says the justice accused
him of contempt of court, but offered
to make the fine a nominal one if the
attorney would plead guilty. Murphy
declined to do so, maintaining that
court was not in session when he made
the remarks and that any way he had
no intent to be contemptuous, but
simply wanted his cases tried before
some other justice.
Justice Margetts, however. construed
it otherwise and imposed the fine as
stated.