Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1905-12-14
JUDGE POWERS
TALKS To JURY.
Reviews Testimony in Tribune
Libel Suit in His Usual
Dramatic Manner.
HOW HE CONSTITUTES EVIDENCE
says If Verdict Is to be- Rendered II
should be Against Tribune, Which
j. Responsible.

Proceedings IN the long drawn out
Jones-Tribunc libel case were resumed
IN Judge Rtchlc's court at 9;l5 this
morning. Judge Powers opened the
argument for the defense. lie spoke In
part as follows:
II Is not the Tribune that is being
tried but Mr.. Jones, who has found
II true bill against himself 1t Is al
legged that Mr.. Jones character has
been damaged Men Of true character
need fear no criticism or even the shafts
OF falsehood Men who are really IN
jured in character seldom bring libel
suits.
The revelations here do not SHOW MT
Jones to be the just man and humane
tartan claimed for him. The Tribune
reporter simply performed duty IN
reporting conditions at the iA1rmory.
He was sent 90 do the work. He should,
nj least, have been spared the assault
made upon him lie Is not on trial II
verdict Is Ia be rendered against any
body II should be against the Tribune,
for II is responsible for what il pub
fishes. The articles were vigorous.
That Is the Tribune style. II matters
not how strong they may be. so long
as they are true,
AN AGE OF GRAFT
We are IN the age Of graft, The
CRATER he's worked his graft In all de-
partments OF life. Graft IN affairs Of
the nation, Of the state. Of countries
and cities demand strong men and
strong newspapers to defend the rights
of the citizens, ~ the widow ana the or
phan When men are grating that Is
no time for soft words There Is an
awakened publl' sentiment against the
CRATER for which frec speech aud "a
free press Is responsible But for n
fearless press no reforms would he
made and wrongs, as IN this instance,
would continue,
DEFINES THE CASE,
This is a case based on petty graft,
Il IL a result of conspiracy amongst
petty grafters. Nh. Harker was
blamed for not looking after af-
fairs at the inhrmary. Does
this excuse the wrongs commit
ted by Jones? Mr.. Harker testified
that he was virtually superseded by
Jones In directing affairs at the in
fimary. Counsel for plaintiff declared
the board Of commissioners could re-
move Jones II the necessity existed.
They did remove him when thcy
learned the true condition Of affairs.
Mr.. Jones was employed at a salary OF
$40 per month. The salary was raise
10 this sum upon the understanding
that he was not to keep his family at
the institution.
DICKENS CITED.
Counsel for defense read Dickens
description OF visit to the work house
as portrayed In oliver Twist and ap-
piled IL 10 the cuse at Issue: he de-
clared It described the bin of fare at
the institution better than he could.
Jones had not been I'm office week
before he made corrupt bargain with
Bishop Sherwood. Goods were ordered
sent to Mr., Jones house; bills for the
same were to be charged on the meat
bills and sent to the intirmaly, The
excuse for requesting goods sent to his
house was that his wife was too III to
go to the Poor House. But Jones'
family had no right TO be at the Poor
House. Jones tells YOU I'm the testi-
mony that he was hribed by a Bishop
of his Church to obtain family supplies
at wholesale prices. and charge them
TO the county. Jones' testified that
Bishop Sherwood approached him with
this improper proposal. Sherwood de-
MED this Sherwood had nothing Ia
gain by such an arrangement The
accounts of Jones and the inhrmary
were merged because Jones-the in