Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1906-08-20
Because Objection Was Raised
To Introduction Of improper
Testimony.
IN PROSECUTION" OF Jones.
County Commissioner Mackay Forced
To Admit He Knew Nothing About
Purchase OF Certain Articles.

The case Of William r. Jones. Jrr
charged with embezzlement and grand
larceny, which was fled IN Judge
Diehrs court and later dismissed upon
motion OF Parlay =. Christensen. coun-
ty attorney candidate Tor Congress,
ETC. and which case was again revived
By the same Farley r. Christensen by
the filing Of another complaint in
Judge Dana r Smiths court was be-
gun this morning
FARLEY WAS WoRsTED.
County Atty. Farley p, candidate
for Congress. etc. was on hand with
nine witnesses Only two were put
on the stand when the prosecution
bumped up against It hard There was
an amusing mix no between Farley 2.
and Atty. SOren G. Christensen. coun-
sci for the defense IN which Farley
got the worst OF IL.
u was during the examination OF
John c. Mackay. chairman Of the
county commissioners. former Demo-
crat and present Republican, wherein
Mackay attempted To show the rule
concerning the purchase Of supplies
for the county On direct eNamina-
lion Mr.. Mackay was asked II he
knew how certain articles were pur-
chased by Mr.. Jones He said he did,
and that Of his own knowledge.
Atty. Soren Y. Christensen stated
that be would examine the witness and
see lust how much he did know. TAX
ing the complaint counsel for defense
asked
But MACKAY DIDN'T KNOW.
with reference to this broken plate
valued al so cents. how. when and
where was IL purchased p
Mackay was extremely evasiye; got
red I'm the face. expostulated and
wanted 10 make an explanation Farley
+. objected 20 the custom. but the
court overruled the objection Coun-
sci Tor defense then enumerated sew
eral other articles such as broken
knife, a tea strainer. an old tumbler
and some shoe strings. etc, and asked
Il witness knew anything about them.
OF any other articles mentioned In the
complaint. After a long wrangle, Mr..
Mackay admitted that he did not, OF
his own knowledge, know anything
about them.
COUNTY ATTORNEY ANGRY.
The result OF the mix up angered
Farley p. greatly. With Blazing eyes
and shaking hand he reared to counsel
for defense.
you can't rule THIS court nor the
county attorneys Office"
Counsel for defense smiled and Judge
Mana r GpffFh 1rlr "a
tent remarks will have no effect on this
court as I propose TO hear the case
strictly on is merits and according 10
law and the rules Of evidence"
To every question put to Mackay II
he knew OF his own knowledge how,
when or where any article mentioned
In the complaint was purchased, Mac
kay answered NO" He finally ad-
mitted that he knew nothing about IT,
Mr. Maokay was then excused.
THE REFRIGERATOR
The next witness was Frank Higgn.
bOtham. deputy county auditor. liz
was shown voucher and identified the
signature Of Mr. Jones thereon. The
effort 10 introduce the voucher failed
because the articles mentioned IN the
voucher were not named In the COM
plant. The prosecution then produced
a voucher for 1906 for the purchase
Of articles from the King Hardware
company, among the articles named on
a BIN attached 10 the voucher was one
refrigerator.
FARLEY PLEADS FOR TIME.
The Introduction Of the two docu-
ments was objected 20 on the ground
that Higganbotham did not know. Of
his own knowledge, that the articles
mentioned in the bill were the same as
that called for IN the voucher. The OBJ
lection was sustained by the court but
Farley r. pleaded 10 the court TO take
the matter under advisement until
this afternoon. Judge Smith stated
several times that the voucher itself
did not prove ownership by the county,
and that the witness. OF his own know.
ledge, dld not know anything about u.
The matter will be finally ruled on
this afternoon when County Attorney
Farley 7. Christensen. etc. win pre-
sent authorities on his contention that
the .rtsecution aud the court can
presume evidence against the de.
PENDANT.