The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1900-05-13
TRIBUTE To THE DEADIASKS FOR GRAND Jury
City Attorney Is On Chief Hill
toms Trail.
STEP TAKEN YESTERDAY
NO DECISION REACHED BY
JUDGE NoRRELL
He May or May Not Grant the Re-
quest Made by Mr. Stephens
Council Committee VIII Further
Consider the Question at Meet
ing TomorroW-Dr. King Talks.

~~~s9-NASA
ing TomorroW-Dr. King Talks.
The charges against Chief of Police
Hilton are assuming wider proper
lions. City Attorney Stephens made
application to Judge NorreII in cham
Ders yesterday for the appointment of
q special grand jury to examine into
the charges.
The action of Judge NoTreH is not
known for he has not said what he will
do, nor intimated his course even to
Mr. Stephens. When he received the
application and talked q very little
about the matter with the city attor-
ney, he said that he would consider
the matter. 1t is not likely that he
will do anything until Monday.
The case has aroused a vast amount
Of discussion. 1t has become, in fact,
the most important subject of CONVEX
sation. A large majority of those who
have expressed opinions have de-
nounced the action Of the chief of pO-
lice. But the chief does not care TO
say anything farther about the mat
ter. He was informed of the action Of
City Attorney Stephens last night, but
he would say nothing more.
This application of the city attorney
was hardly formal, and the paper has
not been filed with the court records
by Judge NOrrell, though Mr.. Stephens
gave him permission to do so. 1t may
not be filed until action is taken by
the court.
Why Action Was Taken.
Mr.. Stephens has taken this step
partly as city attorney and partly as a
private citizen. He had a conversation
on Friday with County Attorney Put
nam, and on hearing that nothing was
to be done by him, concluded to make
the application for 8, special grand
jury.
He believes that the chief. or who
ever is responsible for the affair that
took place at the police station, is
guilty under sections 4l8S and 4l4l Of
the revised statutes of Utah.
Hhe maintains that under the first
section the personal liberty of the
girls was violated, and that under the
second, oppression and inhumanity
was pracuced.
Section Ass reads; False inprison-
ment is the unlawful violation of the
personal liberty Of another" Section
4189 defines the penalty as follows:
False Imprisonment is punishable by
fine not exceeding $4,000, or by i'm
prisOnment in the county Jail not more
than one year, or both"
Section 4141 reads: Every officer
who is guilty Of Willful inhumanity or
oppression toward any prisoner under
his care or in his custody, is punish
able by d fine not exceeding ST. 900 or
by imprisonment in the county Jail not
exceeding one year"
q thought that the public expected
something to be done in this matter, 3"
said Mr.. Stephens, "and when / read
the interview in the papers with Coun-
ty Attorney Putnam on Friday, went
to him and asked if he was quoted
correctly. He told me practically the
same thing, I then told him that
would make application to Judge Nor
rell' for a special grand jury to investi-
gate the affair He made no objection
He did not believe that an Offense had
been committed, and there was con-
sequently no reason why he should pro-
coed against the chief of police.
But 1 thought as the public expected
something to be done, it was my duty
to act, and therefore L have applied
for a grand jury.
No Sixteenth Century Methods.
Ct don't believe in sixteenth century
methods in this day and age. Any
citizen could have done the same thing,
but, Of course, the public would nat
urally look for official action. When
1 was prosecuting attorney 1 had a
case somewhat similar, but not so fla
grant as this one. There was a gold
brick swindler in the county jail and
the man whom he robbed was permit
ted to tie him up by the thumbs and
eXtort a confession. He was indicted
by a grand jury.
"As the case stands, I thought that
the duty deyolved upon me to see that
any unlawful actions Of officers is pun
ished."
This action is. Of course, entirely
apart from anything that the city
council may do That body has only
the power of removal, with the aid Of
the mayor. It will not act until next
Tuesday night.
The grand jury, if it found the chief
or any one else guilty, or had reason
able ground to believe that he was
guilty, would bring in an indictment
, on which the accused would be tried.
A meeting of the police and prison
committee with the chief of police and
the mayor has been called to meet at
the mayors Office at o'clock on Mon
day. This was arranged at the council
session Friday night, and an effort was
made to keep it quiet. Several coun-
cilmen wanted to take action on the
report Of the prison and police COM
mittee at the council meeting, but they
were persuaded to let it so till Tues
daz.
Mayor Favors Censure.
It is said that Mayor Thompson is
N favor of a censure or reprimand Of
the chief by the council, but he has
not made up his mind that there should
lie a removal. He asked the members
CT the police and prison committee
Friday night if they would be willing
70 have the chief present during the
discussion Of his case, and the mem
hers said that they did not object.
It is said that the mayor wants TO
avoid taking the initiative and that he
would rather have the council take the
first action. Up to last night there
was a majority of the council in favor
OF the removal of the chief. Whether
or not there viii be any change after
the meeting on Monday is, Of course.
nor known.
Iartenstein said yesterday that he
would not consent to any modification
of his resolution adopted at the COM
mittee meeting at the Office of the
chief on Friday. he Sid that if the
majority insisted on a change he would
send the report in as a minority re-
port.