The Ogden standard. [volume] (Ogden City, Utah) 1902-1910, 1909-02-26

again and it goes in tomorrow
don't think there will be any
trouble the senator went on, for
have never given him any cause to
make trouble, but my friends insist
! that I arm myself j do not see any
use In 1t, but / am willing to oblige
my friends. This is Sunday night.
have no revolver, and cannot buy one.
Will you lend me one?'
, II gave him that pistol. He did not
| know how to use II. told him 1t was
a selfacting revolver and all he had
10 do was to pull the trigger. 1 re-
moved the loads and demonstrated
the use Of the weapon"
What was Senator Carmacks de-
meanor?"
Quiet and calm"
Did he denounce or attack Colonel
Cooper"
NO. SIR
Where did he put the revolver"
"In his hip pocket"
What did he say he said to Craig?'
That this was not the first threat
ening message he had received from
Col Cooper"
court
I'VE object to all except that the
senator put the revolver in his pocket
To all the rest, we object"
Because 1t was not communicated
to the defendants?" retorted Judge
Anderson.
Another lengthy argument followed.
The states contention was that the
defense had tried to prove by Craig
that Senator Carmack was In an ugly
mood, that he sent for a revolver and
that he began the attack. In rebuttal
It offered the proof that the senator
was not in an ugly mood, that he had
a firm belief that there would be no
trouble. that he wanted revolver only
to satisfy his friends and that he did
not even know how to use 1t.
Judge Hart said the question was
most important, as 1t affected the
states rcbuttal.
Recess was taken before the argu-
ments We're finished.
Yesterday Afternoons Proceedings.
Judge Hart ruled that this editorial
(or any reference to it, was incompe-
tent and refused to hear any argument
from the state.
Did you take any exception to any
editorials Of the same nature, except
those written by Senator Carmac%
II objected TO every mean EDITORIAL
And were there many Of them?"
"No, sir"
you resented other editorials in
other papers. but you took no action?"
well, felt the personal allusion
and resented 1t mentally"
But you wrote threatening noteS?"
"I didn't send any note In the Car
mack case for months after the stump
attacks and editorial attacks had been
going on"
Were you subscriber to the Mes
senger?"
II was not, thank Cod" ferventlv.
You bought 1t to read?"
Il did not. read 1t at the club"
"You objected to the editorial saying
the Democratic committee was trading
Bryan for Patterson"
81 did"
'"Why?"
Because 1t was untrue"
But 1t appeared first in the Amerl"
can, didn't IT."
Il don't care II 1t appeared in the
Holy Bible. 1t was a lie"
But your name wasn't used In it?"
NO. not until Carmack used 1t and
connected me with it."
Colonel Cooper denied that he had
brought Cox and Patterson together,
but said he would have been willing TO
have done so. He would not consider
It disgrace to have done so, but re-
sented it because 1t was untrue.
The state continued to revert to
the political fight which Cooper was
charged with settling. Invariably. the
testimony was ruled out. "You had
better get off politics and get onto the
facts" said the court.
did you tell Robin Cooper on No.
yember 9. that You expected trouble
with Carmack?"
II said something to that effect"
Didn't you make that statement
because of the threatening message
you sent to Carmack?"
Eyes. sir, and the message I got
back through Mr. Craig was that Car
mack was In an ugly mood"
IF you got message from man
who said the town was too big for both
OF you, what would You understand"
IF I had received the message
sent Carmack, 1 would consider that
either had 10 stop the attacks or pre-
pare myself to meet him."