Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1905-05-15
BEFORE REFEREE II. ]. DININNY
Opinion Ia that Evdencc Adductd VIII
Not be Sufficient TO Convict
Him.
JUDGE MORSE ON WITNESS STAND
Testified That Meyer Had Not At.
tempted to Deceive Him, an Had
licen Alleged,

Tho case of tho prosecution IN tina
dsbamcu, charges nlod against Attor'
noy George W. lioycr, seemed TO IAN
nat IN the court OF Referee H. j. pin.
mny l0ls morninh The leading witness
FOR the prosecution, charles Van Dyke,
was not present ana could not be found,
although special recess WAS declared
while nm effort was made to locate him,
The initiative IN going into all details
Of the transactions involved IN tho
chnrgca VAS taken Wy Mr. Meyer and
his attorney c. \, Patterson When
facts were not brought out by witnesses
Tor the prosecution, Mr. Meyer request
ed that he be allowed 60 mako full
statement OF them 20 the court ana dil
va upon being granted permission, The
Cnec was not concluded today M Van
Dyke could not bo located, ana Attorney
General NJ A. Broolon, who N conduct.
Ink the ease for the state, was COM
PEELED 20 be absent from the city this
afternoon. Tomorrow morning at 10
o'clock the concluding witnessed
for the prosecution VIII be put
upon the stand, and Mr. Meyer VIII
be crosA.oNnminod by Attornoy-Cien.
cral Brcoden However the attorney
general expressed some doubt that "a
croae.cXnmmntion would be necessary,
and seemed to Join IN the opinion NJ
most Of those I'm the court room, that
no ease had been made,
JUDGE MORSE TEsTIrlEs
The vital testimony Of the morning
| was that of Judge g, W. Morse Of the
| Third district court whom n WAS nj.
| legged Meyer had deceived In Ming an
| nlndnyit, ana In whose court Meyer
was charged with indulging In sharp
! practsos,
Judge Morse stated frankly that
Meyer had never 10 his knowledge at
tempted 10 deceive him, had ncvor been
guilty OF sharp practise, and That no
had never thought or lntlmated 10 any
one that Meyer attempted 70 deceive
him,
The calling Of Judge Morse M a wit
moss ramo az the result Of the tostl-
mony Of Attorney Ron Johnson who IL
said ~ have drawn un tho charges
against Meyer, and who testified That
Judge Morse had expressed To him his
surprise at the action NJ Meyer The
statement Of johnson was received with
something ~ shock by the attorney
for hls own side,
who stated informally That this was
quite at variance with the statements
of Judge Morse I'm "A conversation with
HIM 10 settle the matter judge Morse
was called, ANA proved to be tho best
witness of the day IN favor Of the
man ON trial.
A SERIOUS MATTER
While on the stand AttY,tgn 3rcod-
on asked Judge M0rso' "Dd YOU over
Intimate 10 Mr. JOHNSON or 10 Mr. In
ucg ono of the complaining witnesses,
nat Mr. Moyor was guilty Of No!p
practise"
mot mat | Nmombcr" was tho roe
ply "0nd If had ever mndo such re-
mark think | should remember H. Tho
matter Of an attorney dccoiylng or NJ.
tempting 10 deceive the court ~ of
such Importance that | could not have
forgotten H."
In connection with tho 0ng Of tho
charges Mr., Meyer stated on Tho stand
that when ho had FIRST threatened 10
sue muca because no would not pay
$3.50 due on n promlsoly note, signed
hy himself ana duo Ia Paul H. Smlh,
limos threatened 10 follow both smith
ana Meyer clear 10 NJ II they inshl'
I'D IN forcing payment
ORIGIN OF COMPLAINT,
Tho dlsbarmcnt proceedings Originate
cd IN charges drawn up IN the law olllco
Of Fowler a Johnson, by MI Johnson,
II appears from the testimony ana
cnrroi 60 n local paper before they
Woro fled by Mr. luucs, who wanted
them published, Tho complaint alleged
that Meyer had "practlSol mischief and
deceit and WAS unsafe 10 the courts"
II was signed by A. w. poiors, a Gloss
friend Of lunoe, by W, II, lnnoe, and g,
Rounard, who has business rotations
with !nneg, Tho mlttrr Of hearing tha
chnrppN Was rororrod 10 lloforoo " !,
Dmimy, ANA trlt was begun FOiul'
day afternoon AZ ihut limo funos,
Henry Moniloca ana u, H. WungOr
were examined, bat nothing was found
| IN cause amy concern to Meyer or hts Mt
tnruuyg Judge -, w, Powers Judge j,
IT, fHak and Attorney G. p, Patterson
This morning the ease was rouumei
at 10 O'Clock Attorney JOHNSON was
| placed upoN the stand, In or0ss'oNom.
nation he confessed 10 considerable III
foo,ug against Attorney Meyer but dec
MED that this WAS the cuuse of hlh
drawing up the charges,
Following hW testimony Mr. Meyer
requested TO mako a abatement of 'jnst
what thoro To- I'm this whole case, ana
whit the underlying circumstance
were"
starting with MA suit against tho
Salt Lake Cleaning company Mr. Moyor
| told the history ~ tho SUIT 10 mldi
MT tunnel who llvos IN my nclghbor.
! hood came 10 me one nlFhl ana eNld
| the cleaning company Of G., llonnord
! Mad a suit of clothes uf his which thoy
! nli was lost, and which he had tried
10 get for u long time unsuceosstullN I
| told him no had u good coso aRolnet
| them and could recover either the suit
| or the value W H. A day or two after
| ! called M nonnord'e shop ana stated
| that suit would ho illo1 unlos6 ho de-
| lyorod the clothog ITO promised 10
deliver them az once but IN 10 days Mr.
| Rumol again tDld nae they had not hcon
| delivered We then fled q suit ana II
remained for 30 days when Bonnard
met mo ON Wcst Temple street ana said
ne had found them ana would deliver
| them az once, tie dld not do THIS, ana
nnally we took Judgment against him
| for their value, oa sworn to by Mr.,
| RumcL
"ThIs judgment Bonnard claimed 10