The Salt Lake herald-Republican. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1909-1918, 1910-09-20
COUNTY ATTORNEY
REQUESTED TO ACT
William ThuTStOn Brown Asks
Official to Issue Complaint
Against Policeman.
WON'T ACT AT PRESENT
Prosecutor Says He May Grant In
formation if the City Authori-
ties Fail to Act.

Feeling that DO would obtain little
satisfaction BIZ hts cudcavors to have
PatroIman G.. w. Pitts punished IN po-
lice court for striking and beating him
while be- was being placed under ar
rest. William ThurstOn Brown. the So
ciafief and former Unitarian minister.
appeared before the county attorney
yesterday and asked Tor complaint
charging Pitts with assault and bat
The charges against AR Brown and
William Jurgcu. who were arrested by
rafrolrnau Pitts Wednesday night for
obgtructinE the sidewalks were ordered
dismissed hy Judge Whitaker vest crday
morning. Judge Whitaker asked N any
one could prove that either Mr. Brown
or Mr.. Iurgen had placed the SOAP
boxes. on which they stood. In the
street while DELIVERING the Socialist
speeches 80 one knew and De dis
Countv Attorney Job =. Lyon. 90
. whom Brown applied for "a complaint.
Instructed him that De would 10 notn-
ing with the case 80 long az 10 was ~
fhc hands OF the city. However. Mr.
. lyon saws that this decision is by no
means final and n 20 appears that inc
city officials viii take no action. he
will issue the mplaint-provided. OF
course. that investigation warranted
the issuance Of a complaint against the
policeman.
Daily Protests
In police court yesterday morning &c
was practically concluded that the war
rant issued against Pitts by the city
attorney office would be indefinitely
Withdrawn and cancelled. Assistant
city Attorney n. j. DAILY contested the
/ right Of Judge +. j. whitaker Co with
draw the warrant To- the arrest or
Pitts which had been issued through
tho usually regular channels. kut
judge whitaker was Of different mind.
holding that the office 90 the city at
] torney had taken advantage Of his per
Fonnl authority In permitting the war
. rant To- be issued.
NJ was not until yesterday that the
l office Of the city attorney lcarneu'
I through newspapers. that the warrant
issued for the arrest o. PatrOlman
Z Pitts had actually been ortsred with
. drawn by Judge whitaker. When the
I court session was nearing Its end city
D Judge Whitaker why n warrant issued
at III o'clock Thursday morning had not
I been served or returned.
Judge whitaker replied that the war
\ rant had not been issued with his con-
I sent and that the prosecutor had tax
I on advantage Of blank warrants bear
INK the signature OF the judge Of TIE
court in making 10 possible 20 draw ur
the Pitts warrant fe held that 81 was
technically the duty 81 the Judge 60 exc
anime All witnesses before permitting
I the issuance Of "a warrant and stated
that be would pursue that system IT an
incident like that OF Thursday occurred
ever again.
To Drop Matter.
Attorney DAILY replied that II the city
attorney office had no discretion m
the issuing nf warrants. 10 presented a
Incw st.tc Of legal affairs 90 him He
explained that the city attorneys office
was usually given such discretion, but
admitted that under the statute 90 was
1.-THE duty Of the court 60 examine the
witnesses. Mr.. Daily intimatcd that the
matter 81 the recall Of the warrant
might pc taken up to the district court
but later admitted that 10 would be as
well Co drop the case
Returning 60 the warrant issued
IaEaiurt Pitts the court stated that u
had examined the witnesses % the ar
fair and had found that the warran
had been issued wronufuily. I'm thai
1.-THE defendant was in the discharge of
his duties as an officer at the time tha
1.-The assault and battery is alleged q
Ihave taken place. Consequently. JudE'
Whitaker holds that the city attorney
Iofficc erred when a. -sked the clerk o
% police court 90 issue warrant fo1
rrrcst Of Patrolman Fits.
ere is the civil court for redress
lin 10 matters" added Judge Whit
Iakcl Il feel 40 is wrong TO inter
tferc with an officer I'm such "a manner
|Tf the com nin lining witness. Mr.. Brown
rczists ratroiman Pitts in his effort q
search him after be- was unable TO Civ
hail. TN, m the city attorney had no rich
to file complaint against the officer
as that a. n direct sllp against the -
forts Of the police. and n carried on
would have decided tendency 20 ma 81
them derclicf and careless In the dis
.rnnrwc OF their duties.