The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1899-02-24
Ground For a Reversal By the SUI
preme Court.
REMARKS OF THE COURT
RESPECTING DIGNITY AND HON
OR OF THE JUDICIARY.
A New Trial Granted In Utah OPP
teal Company VS.. Keith ct al
Eugene Guilty of Grand Larceny
Two Divorce Suits Filed-Wil-
liam Sims Dismissed-Notes.


The supreme court yesterday handed
down an opinion in the case of Edward
Whipple appellant, VS.. William Preece
Joseph Tolliver, Leslie Ashton, Ly-
curgus johnson, A n. Johnson and
Sullen Johnson. reversing the judg-
ment of the district court and remand
ing the case with directions to the
lower court TO grant new trial.
This is the case in which the ap-
pellant relied for u reversal on the
alleged misconduct OF Judge Dusen-
berry who presided at the trial. 1t
was alleged in the brief that Judge
Dusenberry was drunk at the trial and
entirely under the influence of the at
torneys for the defendant, made practi-
calIy all the rulings in their favor,
gave no instructions to the jury except
handing over TO them the written re
quests of the defendants and refused
the requests of the plaintiff.
The action was brought to recover
property sold under an execution and
alleged to have been wrongfully con-
verted. The supreme court opinion
was written by Chief Justice Bartch
and concurred in by Justice Basxin
and District Judge McCarty. 1t says
in part:
character that we refrain from quoting
the affidavit lest injustice might result
by so doing and fearing that some or
them may have been made without due
consideration by the affiant- Especially
so, since some of them appear to be
controverted by counsel for the res
pondents in their brief.
Were it not for the apparent candor
in which. and sincerity and feeling
with which this matter has been
argued by counsel on both sides in
their BRIEFS we would be constrained
to pass the affidavit in silence. owing
to the depressing effect which a judi
cial discussion of such questions must
have on the populace, in their respect
and confidence in the judiciary of the
state and country. and TO the high
respect and consideration which is due
from us to the judges of inferior
courts. and to the protection from I'M
just assaults upon them. in this court,
which IS Que from us. Under the cir
cumstances, however, and in the alb
sence of any denial of the truth of the
charges by the judge or action by
him in the premises. it becomes our
solemn duty to express our unqualified
diSapproval of such conduct on the
part of court as is set forth in the
affidavit. Due respect for the exalted
position, proper regard for the welfare
of society. security to human rights
and liberty, as we'll as every principle
of justice. command this of US. If the
charges are untrue the attorney max
ing them ought to be promptly dis
barred; if they are true, which we do
not assume TO say, then the court
portrayed his own disapDrOval and
condemnation. Beyond this We have
no power in the premises 1t is all
important that the purity and in
tegrity of the bench should be pre-
served-that the high character, which
the judiciary has always borne should
be maintained for it is that that gives
stability To government and guaran-
tees personal rights and liberty
The opinion then goes on TO state
that in times of exigencies the people
have turned to the judiciary with
confidence that the law would be ad-
with fairness and ability
unclouded by improper motives.
In conclusion the opinion saws that
the court is not prepared to say that
the jury was not misled by the action
of the court and therefore a new trial
is granted.