Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1905-02-11

! NtAlN9 vi 0Adu bldht lOl i've years. anu
! know positively that the Instructions
/ we received were not 10 entertain any
case where titles to land or titles to
water or anything Of that sort were
] concerned
Nh Tayler-Then do sou deny that
| they entertained this caSe2
Senator Smoot--l do not
! Mr. Tayer-l say upon what theory
do you say they did entertain Il?
Senator Smoot-l think Il 'Vas mad
| yertently done by the Presidency Of the
| church. the case coming there as II did,
! and they busy as they are. ] rather
| think II was inadvertently done by
/ them, because their letters are Of such
q character that they prove that they
| had taken just the opposite position.
Now, | am not referring TO the letter
that was written in this case here.
! That may have been written and no
doubt was, by them, oW | believe Il
was inadvertently done.
Mr.. Tayier-Do you think the action
Of the Bishops court was inadvertently
taken2
Senator Smoot-'rhat I cannot say.
Mr. Tayler-Do you think that the
action Of the High Council Of the stake
was inadvertently taken?
Senator Smooth know that the presi-
dent Of that stake had received writ
ten letter from the Presidency OF the
Church telling him that these cases
were not TO be tried.
MIR Tayler--BefOre or after this?
Senator Smoot-Before,
MIR, Tayler--Before2
Senator Smoot--As the letter so states
here.
Mr.. Tayler-You will remember that
the woman in the case the accused in
the case. communicated with the First
Presidency?
Senator Smoot--I think she did,
Mr., Tayler--And you know that she
got more than one letter from the First
Presidency on the subject do you not
Senator Smoot-I would not say that.
| do not remember that
MIR. Tayler-She got one letter signed
by all three Of them in their own hand
writing?
Senator Smooth you suggest It, and
say II is so, would accept It,
Mr., TaylerSThe language Of that an
swer is not formal, Is II? 1t is printed
here IN the record
Senator Smoot-Yes; it is In the rec
ord
Mr.. Tayler-It Is not formal Lam
guage II is explicit.
Senator Smoot-T could not say.
Mr., Tayler-It refers to the case, does
It not?
Senator Smoot-I rather think it does
Mr.. Tayler-lt shows that the writer
Of the letter knew what the case was
to which reference was made2
Senator SmoOt-I think so.
Mr., Worthington-Do you remember
what Is In the letter?
Senator Smoot-I do not.
Mr. Worthington-Let the letter speak
for itself.
Mr., Tayler-No ! am cross examn-
ing the witness. | am trying
Senator Baley--Mr Chairman, l
object to counsel conducting this as II
they alone were concerned. Counsel
has a perfect right TO make objections
to questions or TO the method of exam
nation, but that objection should be
made to the chairman. The counsel
SIT at the other end Of the table and
proceed to talk with each other, and
to order the stenographer to put thing
down or to omit IL, and 1t appears to
me clearly an improper method OF
procedure / suggest, In the best OF
humor, but shall insist upon IT, where
objection is made, that II shall be made
to the chairman, after the manner Of "A
court.
Mr.. Worthington--I would have been
very glad indeed If from the beginning
the proceedings here had been such as
are ordinarily pursued in court.
The Chairman--rhe suggestion of the
senator from Texas Is very proper
one und " any objection is made on
either Side 1t should be addressed to
the chair, so that the committee may
pass upon It.
MIR. Tayler-Do you recall. Senator,
that I'm the letter from the First Presi-
dency reference was made to the fact
that Miss Birdsall wanted either to APP
peal directly to the FRS, Presidency
or go to law?
Senator Smooth do not remember It.
Mr.. Tayler--And that the statement
was that she should obey the order OF
the Lord?
Senator smoot-I would not like to
testify without knowing positively.
Senator Beyeridge--What Is that?
Senator Smoot-I would not like to
testify with respect to what is in that
letter without knowing positively.
Mr., Tayler-l call your attention to
the letters printed on page 32s of the
second volume.
Mr., Worthngton--Th original let
ters, which are now referred To-
Mr., Tayler-I do not care for the
original letters, They are printed here
Mr., Worthlngton-I will say that af-
ter we got through using them hand
ed them to Senator Smoot, and asked
him to retain them until the commit
tee had given some order In regard to
them,
The Chairman--Have you the letters?
Senator Smoot-I received the letters
from Mr. Worthington, and | think I
gave them to Mr.. Van Colt, did | not2
Mr. Van Cott--I do not think so, Sem
ator although you may have done So
II | have them they are at the rooms
with the other papers,
Mr. Worthngton-l am Informed
that they are In the senator's office In
the Maltby building.
The Chairman--P Proceed, Mr.. Tayer.
Mr. Tayler--Do you recall that that
letter written to her states that
This Ia I'm answer 10 yours Of the 10th
instant In which you express a desire
To appeal your case direct to US from
the Bishops court or go to law.
In answer we would say that In all
such matters all members Of the
Church are expected to follow the order
Of the Church governing them, and
that order provides that an appeal may
be taken from the Bishops court 10 the
High Council and from the High Coun-
ell to the First Presidency
we would advise you to follow the
order provided of the Lord to govern
In your case"
Mr. WorthIngton--From what page
DO you read?
Mr. Tayer -32S.
Senator Smoot-I think the letter
means this, that she had started the
case in the Bishops court, and after
she had received the Bishops decision
ana was dissatisfied she then wanted
10 appeal TO them or go to law
Mr. Tayler-That she had started
the case2
Senator Smoot--Well the case was
started, and she was a party to the
case.
Mr.. Tayler-Now, then. you recall
that letter on, April 10, 1903 the Presi-
dency Of the Church Joseph f. Smith
John r.. Winder. and Anthem II, Lund,
wrote to her, saying;