The Utah County Democrat. [volume] (Provo City, Utah) 1898-1909, 1899-04-22
THs HAYES CASE.

The STATE Board OF Pardons ha
postponed he hearing on the applica
. tion OF Harry +. Hayes for release On
III their next meeting on May o. Last
Sundays Salt Lake Tribune presented
10 full The evidence gathered In The
case by Sheriff storrs Of Utah county,
all OF this evidence tending TO estab,
lish the guilt Of Chas. +. Wright, alias
Weeks. etc. This evidence has been
gathered With great care and persever.
ance by Sheriff Slorrs, and that hard
working official ~ entitled 20 vast
amount OF credit for his efforts toward
the release OF a man whom he believes
10 he innocent. But the question Is, In
the light OF the evidence so far at hand.
is the innocence OF Hayes establishedS
We do not believe that we should
necessarily follow the lead Of some Of
the State papers which have ac-
copied the absolute. innocence OF
Harry Hayes aud the sole guilt OF
Wright and have by inference con-
demned the honorable citizens OF the
State who assisted In the original pro-
secution. In regard to this notable
case II is fact that Harry Hayes was
convicted by one OF the strongest
chains OF clrcumstantial evidence ever
known. 1t lisa fact chat he was con-
vicled with the approval of every
nearer and every person who carefully
watched the evidence as presented.
We believe that an injustice TO the peo-
pie Of The State. and particularly OF
Utah county, will be done II he is
turned loose. on the strength Of the
evidence now before the board OF par
dons. While that evidence may es-
tablish the completely OF Wright in
the crime, IL does not disprove the
guilt of Harry Hayes. The jury who
tried the Hayes case and found the
defendant guilty of murder in the first
degree were 'twelye good men and
true They are among the best
known and most respected citizens of
Utah county. They were then aud are
now satisfied OF the guilt of Hayes.
The Judge, McCariy, who tried the case
was without prejudice, he Is able and
he was most painstaking In the trial OF
the case to see that only justice was
done. The attorney for Hayes. J. w.
N. Whitscotton, surpassed any record
he had ever heretofore made In the de-
Tense; he overlooked no point and bis
address aud appeal 10 The Jury was
masterpiece OF eIoquence aud pathos.
Yet Hayes was adjudged guilty, the
jury beIieyed IL. the judge believed 1t
and the pubic believed II. This appli
cation fer release presents peculiar
phase: II is the only application ever
presented to the State hoard OF par
dons which Is not endorsed by any Of
the jury who convicted. by the Judge who
presided, by the attorneys who prose-
cuted or by the sworn officers OF the
law who made the arrest and collected
the evidence. Is II not peculiar that
all Of these men still believe that HAYES
is guilty. The jury which tried Hayes
was composed of some Of the best men
In Utah county and II would be an i'm
possibility 10 collect more honest set
OF men for that duty, Yet they found
Hayes guilty. We know Hayes per-
sonally and the evidence as presented
wa conclusive 10 us, as II was to all
wLo read the evidence. He may be an
innocent man. but Is II not better To
walt until his innocence is proved be.
fore chance is taken on the release on
the public Of possibly desperate
characterY We believe that an inius.
tice has been done by the Salt Lake
Herald In tie editorial utterances In re-
gard 10 the case against the jury that
tried Hayes, the judge VINO presided,
the attorneys who prosecuted and dc.
Tended. the able officers who collected
the evidence aud the general public
who accepted that evidence as true
and endorsed The verdict The same
injustice Is perpetraied by the Salt
Lake Tribune 10 It's presentation Of
thu new evidence Sunday This jury
was no' composed OF fiends lhistiug
for human blood; tie prosecutors.
Messrs. Cash, Thurman and Wedr
wood, were not usiug ihelr duty
IS public of1ieIsls 10 satisfy personal