The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1900-12-23
oOoOOOoOoOoOOO ooOOOOOoOooooooo

VIII not mention. as he has since been
called 10 appear before a bar of Justice
whose decisions are final, was once called
uDon 10 decide what punishment should
be melted out to a disturber of the ueace
The culprlt was a rather seedy-IOoking IN
QlElQuai whom his honor had sized up as
be-~E small fry, ana he announced that
ne would impose a fine of SO. Does that
Include the C0StS2'' incurred the. C1fiDrif
Yes said his honor, as he looked at
me rusty prisoner compasSlonately. VINO.
upon being satisfied on this point pro-
bucksl1in sack Wei filled with coin.
His honor opened his eyes in surprise aS
hn realized he had made a mistake. but
quickly recovered himself and, with un-
usual dignity. reiterated:
Ya-~ me viii De SO, to which viii be
added SEQ for contempt OF court
In what way the luckless individual was
IN contempt was not explained, but the
order had gone forth, and that was
enough.
Al one time what is now Uintah county
was a portion Of ANaSatch county
Be1oE@ the territorial legislature pro-
Vided Tor the organization Of Jinta n
county and when the UinIah basin was
Only q precinct of Wasatch, one solitary
justice OF the peace constituted the sole
judiciary of the rather extensive region.
It was during this period that the Smith
lemnity.
smith. whose first name has been long
since forgotten, was arraIgned on the
charge OF having shot daylight through a
ues-hbor on Green river by the name OF
Rice, during the ordinary course Of bust
= he was considered to have acted
without the customary toTmaHty of Civ
ing his man an even cnance he was drag
ged before the magistrate ana jury was
summoned 70 try tke case
There was but one individual in the re-
E-o- ~ that time who claimed the dis
tinctiOn Of being Az attorney. Just what
these claims were based upon nobody
seemed TO know or care This individual
aHH Hnr NJ
seat OF county government. and he went
into the prosecution 81 Smith without any
The my was harangued with vigor and
great effort by the prosecution VINO was
uumOIeSUed IL his conduct OF the case by
T-he reason for this became evident
when the prosecution concluded Tor II
was found that the defendant had retain
ed the prosecution 10 conduct the DEFENSE
which he proceeded TO DO IN Such an Ell
fo-.t..- manner as TO knock the pins all
OuL from unGert the prosecution me
man was acqu1l tea- Rus nonor Whel3 ask
ed what would have been the result had "a
VerCict of guilty been returned, replied
lacon-callz; There would nave been a
hau-in
Al another time TWO prominent cattle
men were disputing the ownership OF
S0Ele cattle. which IN all human prObaDll-
lily We're the property of neither The
cutc----a of the mIX-up was that one
b~or-1t a charge of larceny against the
other and the case went into court.
Cases in those days We're not conducted
accordir 10 any set rules, and the de-
PENDANT. by clever maueUNerlng. succeed
ed IN having his first say
The defense was gIven the first inning
a-s the defendant took the stand while
the prosecuting witness sat hard by. Won
sza--v- where he was 10 come in He
learned later. tor at the conclusion OF the
fofe--iant's story his honor announced
rhat the trial had ended and that he
would discharge the defendant
After this rather abrupt tsrmlna ZION Of
the case his hoSor announced that he
would fine the plaintiff $3.50. and gave per
ern-.tory orders TO the constable 10 seize
80. witness and hold him until the fine
was paid
Another magistrate whose idea of jus
ttce deuendcd upon What amount Of rev
emue there was in any given n-O-ositsOn
used his authority 10 coufscate al Of the
belongings OF one Of his victims. as costs.
ana appropriated them 10 MS own use