Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1908-09-18
'D|EHL IMPOSES A FINE
Clayton DANES Corporation ksqn'rVS
10 Pay $50 for Violation OF
License Ordinance.

. : al 4 & 10 . (
Judge Diehl this afternoon ilnea 6'ne
Clayton-Daynes cerpoliaition Sao W
violation OF the merchants ileel'ss
ordinance. Tha case was called ailel
Judge Diehl and Asst. city Any. 8,
j. DAILY had a consultation Mlsli 4
ncwspaperman they believed respon=
sihlc far>Jhe ridiculous story aPpsa'
ING in the .Organ of the crooks.
A vicious, 3unwarranted ana sarpieu
account of court proceedings appeatS''
in the Tribune this morning III feter-
5ence to, the case Of tbs City VS. me.
CLAYTON DaSrcs Music Company. q
CORPORATION. charged with violating the
license ordinance by not taking ou uis. 9
sproper8license for the business c oii., w w,
ed by the concern In the aiieseas ~
count of the court proceedings, 7si,l ~ ~,
tack was made upon Judge 81 +, lie ~.
of the criminal division OIL t'ie et''
court. 49,,
THAT Judge Diehl is indignant at inc
narbled account OF the trial OF the st lse
Is but putting 1t mildly, but without a,,.
entering a brief for Judge DIEM, tlie
facts are these: NM. 49,
The company was charged VII 8tiie
offensc named. S. /. Goldman. deputy
license assessor complained that tne
company refused TO take out ceri,.ll u
kind OF license The case was caiieu
Yesterday afternoon for trial and upon
the evidence adduced, Judge l)lehi
found the defendant company guilty as
charged and set the time foi sentelste
this afternoon
The Tribune says;
R..Mr Rogers stated that several. sl1ll-
lar license cases had been tried III inc
police court, and each time We're ois--
missed, SO that now the business men men
seemed to have the opinion tina they
can keep from paying their licenses un-
til after they are arrested. and 1t don
cost them any more after than before,
having the use of their money III the
meantime.
Mr.. Rogers. assistant city attorney
and prosecutor in this case, did NOT say
that several similar license cases had
been tried in the police court, ana each
time We're dismissed.
What he did say was this: Many
similar cases have been filed but This
Is the tirst one tried.
The other cases, and there were sew
| eral, were dismissed upon motion OF
| the prosecution.
| In open court. Atty Ashby sno~,
| counsel for defendant company, stated
!.
| torney, fold him that this particular
case would be dismissed. Instead OF
| being dismissed the matter was trle9
| and the defendant found guilty and
/ time set for sentence this afternoon:
This is the first case Of the kind that
has been tried III Judge Diehl's court
| 1t is the first time that a case Of TINS
kind has been presented by testimony
| All the other cases of this character
were dismissed on motion of the city
| attorney or one OF his assistants. II
this matter Judge Diehl did not take
the case under advisement" as stated
| in the Tribune and neither was the
dignity Of the court brought tc
'front.' .ssz. l,.,,. i,
! the declaration that Asst. City ATTY
| r, i. DAILY assured him that the case
against the music company would %
dismissed. This being true, is 1t any
wonder that counsel for defense want
| cd the case dismissed?
Undoubtedly the intent, OF the gar'
| bled account as published in, the Irib.
une was to put the court In a raise
light; blame Judge Diehl for the al,
legged non collection of license, and a,
the same time protect those OF tins
present administration, VINO ar.
| responsible for the acts compia1ned OF