The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1906-02-21
JURY NOW HAS CONTROL OF CHAMBERS FATE
indications at II O'Clock That Jurors Might Not Reach an
Agreement-Last Day Occupied With Arguments
of the Lawyers in the Case.

jurors to put themselves in the defend
ants place. He asserted that Mr.. Skeen
had violated the law of hospitality by ap-
peaTing on the witness stand and telling
Of a private conversation between himself
and the defendants at the plaintiff s
home.
Mr.. Macmillan, also for the defense,
said that the work done by the council
men on the several committees was done
committee to see that the work was prop
erly done. He paid his compliments to
Mr.. Halverson, to whom he referred as
the serious district attorney" and said
that this official had stated that the
councilmen were Stealing while his own
brother, James HalverSOn, had received
more money as extra compensation tnan
any two councilmen. James Halverson
was formerly CITY treasurer. Before the
Jury could convict, he mentioned that they
would have 10 conclude that the council
men were petty thieves, and that Cham
bers did not have "cold feet owing to
the fact that the vouchers were cashed
within one month after they were issued.
He questioned the memory of Mr.. Skeen
in regard to this matter, and referred to
the bringing Of the action as merely a
means for the plaintiff to get even, and
there were other statutes under which the
action could have been brought had the
motives been different He closed with
the statement that the action was brought
under this statute with the direct inten-
ton of besmirching the defendants good
name.
HaIverson Closes Case.
District Attorney George Halverson
spoke last He delivered aforceful argu-
ment. fun of facts. While the pleadings
Of the counsel for the defense were lack
1 ing in reference to testimony introduced in
the case, Mr.. HalNerson's argument was
mostly along this line, in an effort to
show that ali that was claimed by the al
legations was supported by the evidence
submitted. He said that a great effort
was made to show that the action was in
spired by malice on the part of the plain
tiff against the Standard and Examiner.
He pointed out how Mr.. Skeen had
warned the councilmen on two separate
occasions by open letters of the alleged
irregularities, and stated that there was
no malice in such action. He asserted
that after these articles appeared Skeen
was '1ampooned. lambasted and libelled"
through the columns of the Giasmann pa
pers. He did not care 70 say much about
the city attorneys opinion. since that
was asked only after the appropriation
had been made. He contended that 1t
served to show that the defense was in
desperate straits. He pointed to the fact
that the defense had brought the father
Of one of the jurymen into the case to tes-
I tifv to the good character Of the defend
ant for no other purpose than TO influence
that particular juror. This argument
was objected to by Attorney Maginnis.
but after argument on the objection. was
had the court permitted IL to go in. He
scored the conduct of the opposing coln-
sci BY saving that there was only one fair
inference to be drawn, and that was that
they were endeavoring to attract the
/ Jurors minds from the real facts at issue.
and he paid compliments to those VINO ar
gued before him by stating that one was
adroit the other eloquent and masterful,
but failed to touch any points in the case.
/ He EXPRESSED himself as willing to stand
on the defendants own testimony on the
question as TO his motives in the matter