Weekly journal-miner., 1909-04-07
lFrom Sundays paiIvl

dismissed the appeal cases of bribery and perjury against Thomas G. Norri! it was supposed that his troubles werC over. On the contrary, 1t appears that there is at least another chapter to be added, for yesterday Attorney General
 Clark, with Robt. E. Morrison of eoun, sel, fled motions for a rehearing in each case before that tribunal. It will be remembered that both eases were previously dismissed by reason of 1 Judge Sloan sustaining demurrers in the district court, and that MT. Morri- son, who was then district attorney, took and appeal to the higher court. The eases then came under the juris- dietion of the attorney general. When the eases came up recently before the Supreme Court at Phoenix, they were not heard upon their merits, but were dismissed because of the default of the Territory. In asking for the rein statement of the eases on the caien- dar, Attorney General Clark in his petition states that his time was whol ly occupied then with the legislature, as was required by the duties of his office, and with criminal matters. He therefore asks for a re-hearing and attorneys who read the petition, state that the showing made will undOubted- ly warrant the request being granted
 In his petition, Attorney General Clark springs a sensational surprise. He points out that the statute of linn itations cannot be pleaded by de fendant except in his answer or in demurrer. This point was overlooked by the attorneys of both sides when the bribery matter was heard here last fall in the district court. At that time Judge Sloan sustained the demur- CT because the indictment was based upon a statute which did not fully cover the offense. When District At torney Morrison asked that new grand jury be drawn in order that the indictment could he cured by drawing it under another statute of the penal code. but Judge Sloan Gn denying the request. declared that the statute of limitations barred any action upon that particular section.
 Tn regard 10 the perjury ease which was also dismissed upon demurrer. Attorneys Clark and Morrison raise the point that Judge sloan was dis qualified to sit in the ease, as he had been subpoeuaed by the prosecution as a witness before tine ease was called in court This is one of number of arguments that are made in the brief. In the event that the rehearings are granted and the points raised by the district attorney are sustained, the ef- feet will he to vindieate the legal contentious of that official as raised in the lower court. but it would not mean that the ease would be reopened. How ever. a point of law would have been established that would serve as a guide for future prosecution in simi- lar cases.
 In the briebry ease, the language of the petition, in the main, is as follows;
 First: In the opinion rendered by this Honorable Court on the goth day of March, 1909, it was stated by this Court, among other things, that the Attorney General had not indicated either by brief or oral argument upon what point or points he desired the Court s decision. The Attorney Gen eral respectfully shows to the Court that since the submission of said case at the January term of this Court, that he has been fully occupied in attend anee upon a Session of the Territorial Legislative Assembly, his duties there at being so continuous and exactlng that he was unable to give proper at tention to number of appealed erIm- inal eases, including the above entl- tied ease; that on the 1lth day or March, 1909, he was called away from the Territory, and was unable to re turn until after the session of this Honorable Court on the goth day of March. For the reasons above stated, he was absolutely preeluded from pointing out to the Court the points which he deemed of sufficient impOr- tanee to be decided by this Court.
 Second: There has been no judicial finding upon the point hereinafter mentioned, and it is the opinion of the Attorney General that the same sbouId be decided in order that a cor rect and uniform administration of the criminal law may be obtained.
 Third: Because error has been committed in the Court below to the prejudice of the Territory in this, to- wit: That the trial Court declared in sustaining the demurrer to the indiet- ment herein that upon the filing of a