The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1914-01-18
MISUNDERSTANDING,
IS PLEA OF MARTINS
Relatives Of ]. III. Martin Are
Purged of Contempt on
Showing in Court.

Special to The Tribune.
OGDEN, Jan. l7.-On their promise
10 go before the grand jury on Monday
morning and answer all questions which
did not incriminste themselves, Mr..
and Mrs. j. +. Martin and their
daughter, Mrs. Nellie Cook, escaped
4 punishment today when cited to ap-
pear before Judge N J. Harris on the
charge Of contempt. The defendants
are, respectively, uncle. aunt and COUSIN
Of Joseph Henry Martin, the supposed
leader of the blackmailers who is now
held for trial N
The relatives OF the accused man All
appeared before the grand jury this
MORNING in response TO subpenss, but
j. F.. Martin refused 70 answer the first
question put 10 him, which was Are
you related to J. II. Martini Mrs
Martin and Mrs. Cook refused oven TO
be sworn, and all explained IN court
this afternoon that they believed them
selves TO be acting within their constr.
tutionaI rights and upon the advice or
eounsal. In the latter statement, how
ever. il developed that they had misun-
derstood the instructions OF their at
torneys. >,
From the explanations in court, 1t
appears that Joseph Chez and a. u
Gordon, former attorneys for the Mar
tins, had instructed them relative TO
their testimony before the grand jury
in the event that they were called rs
witnesses. and later Soren y. Christen-
sen. who was entered officially as the
Martin counsel today, also ADVISED
them
Attorney Christensen. who appeared
for them in the alleged contempt pro-
ccedinga, explained TO Judge Harms
that be had not given his clients IN
eatr
put by the grand jury members and
aid not hesitate 20 instruct them to go
before the inquisitorlal body on Mon
dav morning and answer all questions,
with the usual legal restrictions.
Neither of the Martins nor Mrs
Cook can be required TO answer CUES,
tions imcriminsting themselves, and
Mrs. Martin cannot be required 10 an
swcr questions which might be detri-
mental TO her husband IS. interests. For
n time all three of the prospective
grand Jury witnesses were IN danger OF
punishment FOR contempt by reason OF
the fact. a. alleged in an affidavit OF
James r. Wadman, foreman OF the
grand jury. that j. i. Martin had SAID
80 absolutely refuse to answer any and
all questions before this body and re-
fuse TO give any testimony or make
any statement and by reason that
Mrs Martin and Mrs. Cook had refused
10 be sworn. The women explained their
action by stating that II they took
oath. according 10 their misleading i'm
preston, they would then be required
10 testify.
The affidavit of Foreman Wadman
quotes Mrs. Martin as saying; 81 alb
solutely refuse ia be sworn or TO make
any statement or give any testimony
before this grand jury. The state
meut of Mrs. Cook, according 10 the al
legations OF the grand Jury foreman,
was in substance the same All three
witnesses testified In Judge Harris s
court that they had made such state
meuis, the elder Martin adding that he
considered himself 20 be acting within
his constitutional rights, upon the ad-
vice of counsel.
When Martin said he had been ad
viscd by counsel In the matter. Attor-
ncy Christensen explained 10 the court
that he had not instructed his client 10
refuse answers 10 all questions. but only
20 those which might incriminate him
self The attorney said he had not eX-
uectcd the Martins 10 he called as wit
ncsscs today and therefore had every
reason TO believe that be would be close
AT hand TO advise them regarding ques-
tions which they might not be required
20 answer.
In considering the matter. Judge
tarrgs sald that the Willingness OF ths
witnesses 10 20 before the grand jury
on Monday and testify TO the required
questions did not purge them OF the
charge of contempt in connection with
their actions today. bat rs there ap-
peared TO bc no intention OF doing
wrong he proposed to be lcnient. Under
the circumstances, he declared, tho
court would be entirely justified in
finding all three guilty OF contempt
and passing sentence as prescribed by
law. but In Wow Of the unfamiliar prac
tice because OF the wears intervening
between grand jury investigations aud
also because Of the change IN attorneys
be did not propose 70 be severe.
The court entered an order purging
shcm of tho charge of contempt and
discbsrging them on the assurance that
1hev would appear on Monday morning
and testify.