The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1909-06-12
BROWN Wins AGAIN !
IN SUPREME COURT.
New Trial is Ordered a Second
Time in Noted Forgery
Case. u
DEFENDANT WAS INSANE.
VIRTUALLY THE HOLDING
Verdict, Opinion Says, Should
Have Been Reconsidered,
or Set Aside.

Arthur Brown undoubtedly was in.
sane when, on Nav 2I, 1906, he forged
the name Of the Jtah Apex Mining com.
pauy to one check for $6125 and she
name OF the Butler Liberal Consolidated
Mining company TO another for $3437 80
the supreme court says in an opinion
handed down Friday. reversing the
Judgment of conviction of the third dis
trict court, Judge George G.. Armstrong
presiding. aud remanding the cause for
new trial The opinion is written by
Justice Frick and concurred in by bis
associates.
This is the second time the case has
been before the supreme court on appeal
by Brown from conviction in the trial
court. The first time was in December
Of 1907 Then the supreme court held
that the trial court erred in permitting
the corporate existence of the Utah
Apex Mining company 10 he proved Jv
she admission Of evidence that the COM
pany was generally rcputed 10 be
corporation. when. in fact. II was not
shown that the company vas reputed 10
be corporation in this county, whnrs
Il
was one of tho assignment of errors
this time. but was oycrruIed by the su.
premc court.
The facts in tho case are briefly
these: On MAY 20. 1906, while Brown,
then about 80 wears old, was in the EN-.
plov OF the Utah Apex Mining company
as bookkccpcr and pure hssjne agent ne
purchased certain stocks from a stock
broker amounting 10 Sa562.50. giving
his personal check IN payment The
following day the broker told him his
checks had been diShouored by- the bunk
on which they were drawn. for want
of funds. Brown said he had omitted
to make deposits 10 cover the checks. :
but would do so at once. To make the
deposits he is alleged 10 have forged
the name Of tho Utah Apex Mining com
pany to q check for S6I25 and the name
of the Butler 10 another for s3i37 50.
Bank Raises Question.
Tho bank Oh which the latter check
was drawn appeared TO doubt its gen
uiueness and tclephoncd ". G. Orcm.
general manager Of the Utah Apex com-.'
pany. whose name appeared on the
check. aud the alleged forgeries were
discovered. Brown was arrested at the
depot as he WAS about to take the train
for Los Angeles.
The trial brought out that while
Brown possessed more than ordinary
acumcn in business affairs. his auces-
tors. some ot them were insane. One
OF his great grandmothers died in an
English madhousc. a great grandfather
committed suicide while insane, and his
own father had been afflicted mentally.
For two years prior 20 the alleged crime
Brown himself had exhibited marked
signs Of mental disturbances and break
down.
While rhe Russo-.Tapapcse war was in
progress, Brown conceived the notion
that the japanese were the strongest ma
tion on Garth. and that This was due to
their consumption of rice as 4 prin-
cipa food: consequently he would cat
practically nothing else but rice. The
Jews. Brown held, became rich bccause
they talked and thought. of nothing but
money, and in tins Inc initiated them
Another halurinafiou was that money
could bs obtained from ether and air.
Brown claimed 20 be in possession of 4
the process that would extract money
from ether or air. aud declared that no
would be a millionaire some day. When
his relatives demonstrated with him. he
became NeX"I.
In Peculiar Condition.
About this time his mother died. aud
although be bad been 2u affectionste
son he showed no concern or remorse
over her death. but said that he had
~ PD'ilN'h U'I 5ub IU3i ne WpUju VI lux
her back when he got ready He also
quit Attending lodge. although he had
been faithful member and when
demonstrated with about this said lie
wss becoming the reincarnaiion of a
great lawyer, Al his arrest and trial
he showed no concern or anxiety about
the result
Upon this evidence Brown 5 ease was
submitted to the Jury. with the instruc-
tion irom liza. court that if the Jury
was IN doubt as to Brown sanity 1T
should return a verdict Of not guilty.
The jury returned verdict of guilty,
and the supreme court SAYS that II must
either have misunderstood The court
Instructions. miSappHcd rhem. or else
diSrcgardcd them absolutely. The SUI
rrcmc court. in reversing the lower
court ; Judgment. saws that The trial
court should have instructed the Jury
10 reconsider It's verdict, and II II re-
fused 10 do so. to have set II aside.
''Eo convict Il sane man who is IN
nocent Is deplorable. - says the supreme
court, but 10 sentence an insane man
10 the pcnitcntiarv for y crime he did
not have the mental capacity 10 comnilt
rs intOlcrablc