Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1900-06-11
JOHN C. GRAHAM
is FINED $3.50
Judge Burton Gives Notice Of In
teniion TO Appeal,
JUDGE NORRELL GLAD OF 1T
says Defense IL Doing the PTope
Thing 10 Test Ceriaiu Question
la Higher Court

John C. Graham. found guilty on the
26th ult OF unlawful rehabilitation with
Mary A. Graham and Sarah Potter or
Graham. appeared before Judge Norrell
today for SENTENCED The judgment OF
the court was that the defendant pay
a fine in the sum qf $3.50, OF in lieu
thereof that he BE- confined In the Salt
Lake county jail Tor a period Of $50
days.
A stay Of thirty days was granted in
order that the defendant might hIe a
bin Of exceptions IL being the nten-
ton Of the defense 20 appeal the case
to the State Supreme court
Before pronouncing Judgment Judge
Norrell briefly referred d the case,stat.
ing that the defendant had been in
formed against by the proper officers Of
the court. that he bad been tried by
a jury and found guilty and that Il
now became he duty OF the court TO
pass sentence. When asked II he was
ready for sentence, The defendant said
he was The court then inquired OF
Mr. Graham II he had anything TO say,
when
SUGGESTS LENfENCY.
Judge Burton arose and, addressing
the court in the defendants behalf,
said that taking the evidence and
everything else connected with the case
into consideration, the ends of justice
would be met by the imposition Of a
nominal fine II seemed 10 him thai
the jurors themselves were not fully
satisfied as 10 the defendants guilt,
otherwise they would not have recon
mended the defendant 10 the mercy or
the court.
PUTNAM OPPOSES LENIENCY.
Mr. Putnam, replying. said he was
opposed 20 the exercise OF any lcnl'
ency In this case. III counsel for the
defense was dissatisfied with tho
States evidence. with the information
and the verdict Of the jury. be- had his
remedy In appeal Whai he particular.
IS desired 10 call the courts attention
20 now was the expense the state had
been put To in the trial Of the case.
Judge Burton objected 10 the prose-
cutOr stating what the costs were
claiming II was n7 matirr for the
court consideration III tila dme.
Mr.. Putnam said q was a principle
the court had followed Ia other cases
and Mr. Grahams case was not one
that called for any special considers
tion.
Ju2se Norrell said he would hear
what the prosecutor had 10 say on the
question Of expense. but he was not
prepared to say that Il would have
any bearing on the judgment Of tbs
court.
COST SUM OF $s25lO
Continuing Mr. Putnam said the pre-
limlnary hearing had before Justice
Kr0eger cost the state S4340. The eX-
penses Of the trial. the principal items
being witness and jury fees, were S525'-
TO- He hoped the court would bear
these figures In mind when assessing
the fine. Mr. Putnam then paid his re-
specs 20 Mr. Graham. who he said
had openly and dehantly dlsobeyed The
law for the past three OF four years
The defendant was man well known
throughout the State. He was man ~
influence, but had set bad example
for others This open defiance Of the
law IN Utah would have to be put a
stop to. and he believed the present
was an opportune time for the court TO
lend It's aid by making the punish
ment commensurate with the Wiliul
and unWaranted breaking Of the law.
MAKES No DISTINCTION.
Judge Norrel said that so far as he
was concerned there would be no IA
yoritlsm shown law breakers Hereto
fore he had made Il a rule TO ask men
OF unlawful cohabtation
what their intentions We're as 10 the
future. His honor was now convinced
that this was wrong, for the reason
that the statutes did not confer the au-
.hority upon a court 10 ask such ques-
lion.
~ might just as well" continued
Judge Norrell ask a man convicted |
Of petit larceny, II II was his intention |
10 obey the law I'm the future as 90 ask !
Il of man convicted Of unlawful co.. |
Both have broken the law, !
and II / pvt the question TO one class /
lf offenders fairness demands that / |
put IL 20 all.
The court then fined the defendant |
$3.50. Judge Burton thereupon moved |
'or a thirty days stay IN order TO pre- |
3are and fle bin OF exceptions. which |
vas granted.
The defense will rely chiefly upon the
Of the Information for |
reversal in the higher court II charged |
he defendant with having committed |
he offense Of unlawful cohabltation IN /
Salt Lake county, but the evidence /
showed that one wife lived in Utah |
'Ounty and the other In Salt Lake. The |
lefensc moved 10 Quash the informa-
ion on the ground that II was in con-
llct with the statutes. Judge Norrell |
lverruled he motion, but al the same /
the motion, but al the same
roper construction Of the statute. His
lOnor today remarked that the defense
vas doing the proper thing to have the
luestion tested In the guuraue Courf