Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1903-10-19
APPROACHED OTHERS AS WELL.
,,ddent Occurred in Case of ane
ROcca VS. Utah Savings 4 Trust
Co., Administrators.
srzlFEL CITED TO SHOW CAUSE,
In aft Probability He viii be Made an
Example of so that Others May
Profit by It.

Perhaps one Of the most sensational
charges Of attempt to unduly influence
hry IN its verdict in a civil action,
On .he history Of the district court since
,ho DAVIS of statehood came TO light In
Iudee stewards court this morning
Whom Juror Edward McCarrick filed an
omdavt In which he charged that
Maurice Steifel had approached him
and attempted to give him some inside
Information concerning the case OF
lane Rocca vs. the Utah Savings a
rrust company as administrators CT
,,o estate Of Daniel S. Davidson. de-
,eased seemingly with view to inhu-
once his verdict In that action
TWO OTHERS APPROACHED.
7, was stated that steifel had visited
,wo other Jurors who served on the
case. and Judge Stewart Instructed
those Jurors to file afiidavlts IN relh-
zion to the conversation hau WIN
s,efel In connection with the case anu
o,dared the latter TO appear before MN
vvsdnasdav morning Mt 10 o'clock
ana chow cnuse why he should not be
n"nished for contempt Of court, In or
SerInp Steifel 10 appear Judge stewart
GATED 10 him that his conduct IN ap-
nroo rbinr the Jurors In connection WIN
he ease was most reprehensible ana
Ne, n ever an incident occurred IN
witch man should be made an exam
Mo M for such conduct II was certain
" this one So from all indications the
court will take such action IN the mat
Tor as will serve for an example 10 the
public for some time 60 come
MccARRIcK COMMENDED
Before excuslng the jury from the
case. Judge Stewart stated that he ae'
sired 10 commend the promptness WIN
which Juror McCawck reported the
conduct Of steifel, who was witness
for defendant in the case. He sald tur-
Their that IL Is OF great importance
that the court should be Kept free IRON,
such influences and that IL Is the duty
~ Inc jurors to promptly report any
such conduct as that complained or IN
this Instance
CONTENTS OF AFFIDAVIT,
The affidavit Of Edward McCarrlck
sets out the fact that he was chosen a
juror to try the case above named,
which was on trial on last THURSDAY
and Friday Oct. 10 and l6, and that
Maurice Stlefe was a witness for de-
PENDANT in said case. Further the ar
fant charges
THAT on the evening OF Oct 10, 1903.
and while the case was stu pending
and before the verdict Of the jury in
said case had been rendered, the said
Maurice Steifel called upon atliant at
atlantis home in this city and stated to
aiiant that he desired to speak to him
In relation to the case now pending
and atfant said to him that he did not
wish to hear anything about 1t. The
said Steifel said he desired to state
some facts In relation TO the case, AM
ant told him that he did not wish to
listen to any facts from him and he
said that there was evidence there that
the Judge refused to admit. Aiiiant told
him he did not wish 10 hear anything at
all about the matter and aiiiant dis
missed him. and as the said Steifel was
leaving the house he said that he had
also seen other Jurors In relation to
the matter"
ACTION IN QUESTION.
The action in which the matter arose
was brought by Jane Rocca to recover
from the estate Of Daniel S. Davidson,
deceased, the sum of 81, 62l Go, alleged to
be due for services rendered and for
board for Agnes Castellnl and daugh-
YER who are the daughter and grand
daughter of Daniel s. Davidson II was
alleged that the services were rendered
az the special instance of Davidson
VINO agreed to pay for the same for the
reason that his daughter was an incom-
leIent person and unable to care for
Iherselt The services were rendered be-
tween May 8, 1898 and April 26. 1895
me jury this morning returned seal
"a verdict In favor OF plaintiff for the
total sum Of N,l7tH.
STEIFEL AN HEIR,
=, 1t appears that stefel is an heir to
the estate and hence was deeply inter-
,s'ed IN defeating the clam Of plaintiff
ava IN the verdict OF the jury. Hence
nM conduct In approaching the Jurors
~ connection with the same. He was
III court this morning, having been
sTiNeu with an order 10 appear by
oheflIt Emery When examined by the
Vuurt ne stated that there was dis
que between himself and another witt
seH ABOUT some of the testimony intro
uuced and he went TO the Jurors to set
we the dispute. He stated that all ne
salu about the case 10 Mr.. McCamick
VIZ mat there was nothing to plain
~ claim against the estate. After
rearing his story Judge Stewart or
nrled MIN TO appear Wednesday morn
Ing ana answer The other afidavlts
which will be nlod n. that tt,,.o