Изображения страниц
PDF
EPUB

scionable compensation, why, all the receiver did was to ask the court to fix the amount, and to say that he thought he should have $25,000. He saw the attorneys for both sides and took proof on the subject. There was nothing in all this that an honest man would not have done. A man has got a right to place his own value on his own services. The whole matter was in the hands of the court, and is still there. The court is amply able to take care of the question, and it cannot be successfully claimed that there has been anything but an honest, straightforward course on the part of Mr. | Dyer.

Even the counsel for the court say that Mr. Dyer intentionally did no wrong. They say he omitted to do something that he should have done, but of that we are not convinced. I say in conclusion, after carefully listening to the testimony in this case, an investigation conducted by able attorneys, that Mr. Dyer stands today in an enviable position. He comes from a close investigation without a stain on his character. I submit that no case has been made against him on any point. I will not ask that he be given the presumption of innocence, for the testimony absolutely fails to give any color to any of these charges. I am glad that the investigation has been held, for it will now be seen that Mr. Dyer, Mr. Williams and Mr. Peters have been most unjustly accused by those who brought these charges into court.

Mr. Critchelow said he did not admit that the alleged suppression of facts by the receiver was unintentional.

Recess was taken till 2 p. m.
In the afternoon a further argu-

misled the court, when he had Zion received for tithing, a lot of
nothing whatever to do with the trash, and everything of that kind,
matter placed before the court. If was included in those lists. These
the court was misled, it was lists were used for the transfer to
by itself, and by no one else. But the Stakes. Outside of the current
even that does not appear. Judge tithes, the whole thing would not
Zane says now that it is a bad com- have brought fifteen cents on the
promise. But he did not say so then, dollar. The testimony of the men
and there have been no reasons for a who knew exactly what the prop-
change in his opinion. Certainly erty was, is that the government
no one would now say Judge Zane got $25,000 more than the whole
would be in an impartial frame of thing was worth. The Church
mind, considering the feeling that gave $25,000 more than they had,
has grown up. The compromise not to conceal property, but to get
was not the work of Mr. Dyer-it the case forward for a decree. If this
was not his business but that of the whole property had been put at auc-
parties in the main case; there- tion in March, 1887, it would not have
fore he could not be charged brought 20 cents on the dollar.
with misconduct. Mr. Dyer could Eight months later it had been ex-
not be held responsible for the errors pended; yet this was just at the time
of an attorney, even if it was an of his appointment, and it was be-
error. Right here in this case, lead-yond possibility for him to get it.
ing counsel disagree, and shall Mr. Suppose he had brought suits, who
Dyer say which is right? Even if was he to sue for a pound of butter
he could, he had no right to inter- or a can of honey? And would he
fere in the compromise. He had no not have been assailed for wasting
interest therein. His business was money? Such a course would have
to receive and care for the property. been foolish, and no sane man would
He followed the advice of his attor-suggest it. Could he have identified
neys, and if there was any miscon- a single sheep? It was well known
duct it was on them. Now the that he could not. He had to look
effort is being made to place that to adversaries for his whole informa-
misconduct on Mr. Dyer. How tion, and they would not give any.
much justice is there in that, when He gathered his information little
Mr. Williams and Mr. Peters are al- by little. Everybody would have
lowed to go free? Nothing is said condemned any other course on his
of them but the consequences of part.
their mistakes, if such they were, The point of the whole thing is
are to be saddled upon him. Is this that there was a suspicion that
there any fairness in that? If he the defendants were trying to save
had got only 25 per cent of the prop- their property. An insinuation
erty on the advice of his attorneys, that the receiver was aiding in that
they and not he were respon- caused this investigation, which has
sible.
shown that there is not a suggestion
to form a basis for that insinuation.
There is no ground for the shadow
of a suspicion, yet that is the whole
point of the case. Mr. Richards de-
clares emphatically that the sole
ward the case. The Church sur-
rendered more property than it had.
The government, instead of being
defrauded, have got every dollar,
and more too, than it should have.
As to the Stake properties, these
are still in dispute. The attorney

Judge McBride then took up the sheep question, sustaining Mr. Dyer in the good rental he secured for a lot of scrubby sheep, such as the testimony showed these to be,

ment in behalf of the respondents and at a time when the sheep pros-object of the surrender was to forwas made by

pects were discouraging.

JUDGE M'BRIDE, Mr. Dyer was not a sheepman, who said the results of the investiga- but he obtained all the information tion were important to the respond- he could, and took the best terms he ents in this investigation. Serious could find. It was known for two charges were made against them, months that he would have sheep, and they were called here to an- yet none of these men who were answer. The investigation has about xious to pay 40 or 50 cents per head of the government made arrangeclosed, and now the counsel for were heard of when the sheep were ments for the settlement of the the court only ask that the to be rented. The contract was constitutionality of the law. The examiner find that the court was fair and reasonable. Even if a mis- government is holding back, unintentionally misled. They ad- take had been made, it is no evi- and these men are hounding Mr. mit that there has been no bal dence of bad faith, misconduct, or Dyer to go ahead. What is he to faith. If the court did not have wilful negligence. It might be do? Just what his counsel says: sufficient information it had the an excuse for censuring the Let the test now being made be demeans of securing more. Nothing Supreme Court because it had termined, that he can see his way was said of the value of the real not appointed the shrewdest trader clear. estate compromised. The court un- on the street to this office. But If you had told men who knew derstood that it was a judicious com- there is no evidence that a mistake the situation here that for the money promise; if it had been the full value had been made in this regard. In he has expended, a little over $7000, of the property that had been re- the whole matter of the receivership he could have got $750,000 beported, that would have been a set- Mr. Dyer followed the advice of his fore the suit, they would have tlement, not a compromise. The two attorneys, and it seems strange to said you were a madman. It was a parties agreed upon a basis of com- me that he alone is to be censured matter of great surprise that he got promise, and the court allowed for all the mistakes, instead of put-it with so little expense. We know it on that ground, not on any re- ting it on his advisers. It is absurd that he and his attorneys were representations that were made as to to censure Mr. Dyer for contracts sisted at every step. The returns the value of property in question. pronounced legal by his advisers, are beyond the most sanguine exThat is the usual course, when both simply because some attorney thinks pectations. For keen, close, sucparties agree; the court generally there is a flaw in them. Whether cessful management, considering approves such a compromise upon or not the attorneys were mistaken the circumstances, such an amount being made aware of the agree- is not Mr. Dyer's responsibility. of property was never wrung from ment. The gentlemen engaged for the government, say that today they

consider the settlement a fair one. It would be a gross injustice to charge the receiver with having

As to the $268,000 worth of prop-any people, and it is grossly unjust erty, what did it consist of? Every- to impute wrong to him. thing from a broken-down cradle in I agree with Mr. Richards that it which children were rocked 25 years was no compromise to give $75,000 ago to the finest blooded horse that for $50,000. The receiver had the

Church by the throat, and he pressed them to the wall with all his strength. The government officials at Washington agreed to forward the case, and with this inducement the Church paid over $25,000 more than it had to get the decree. Mr. Dyer succeeded in getting what he demanded; the Church got the case forwarded by sacrificing $25,000. Let those who criticise Mr. Dyer turn and criticise the government, whose the responsibility is. The issue was between the government and the Church, and Mr. Dyer cannot be held responsible. Why is there no criticism for the government counsel, and Mr. Dyer made the scapegoat? It is an effort to enforce vicarious punishment, making Mr. Dyer answerable because the attorneys for the government permitted a final decree?

The question of compensation seems to cut a much bigger figure than whether the government will or will not get any money from the Church. I think Mr. Dyer's course was as energetic as it possibly could be under the circumstances. If he had pursued the course these parties

wanted him to he would have been

ten times more open to criticism. There is nothing against Mr. Dyer in this matter, and whatever failure there is is with his attorneys whose advice he followed. Whether any more property can be followed, is a question between the government and the Church. As to why Mr. Dyer did not report the details of how he got the property, it was not his duty. He was to report the property he got, not how he got it, unless the court requested it.

There is not a line of testimony to show that Mr. Dyer kept anything secret. It all got into the newspapers, and much more than should have been. The court ordinarily trusts its officer, and I think it ought to, for attorneys are usually honest. There is nothing to show that a word was said to mislead any body. I agree with Mr. Richards, that it Mr. Dyer had endeavored to get the property in the way the petitioners suggest, they would have got nothing out of it. There would have been no property to quarrel over. Every man connected with the taking of the property has worked energetically, and if any one should grumble it should be the defendants.

when Mr. Dyer wrung property from
the "Mormon" Church he received
the "odium" of 150,000 people.

Then the hounds began to bay at
Mr. Dyer because he was getting
something they were not. The
hullabaloo is raised because some-
body thinks Frank Dyer, Mr.
Peters and Mr. Williams were going
to get paid. I want money, but I
would not go through the mill F.
Dyer has gone through for $25,000.
Somebody is envious that he is going
to get some money; that is all there
is of it, and that is the basis of this
prosecution. Because Mr. Dyer
tried to agree with both parties so
there would be no contest, he is to be
classed as a great rascal! I think
this

racket has cured him of any desire to be a receiver for a Church corporation. This being hounded by men whom he supposed were just and true is such that he would not go through again for the whole amount he said he thought his services were worth. In cases where men are mere figure-heads, railway receivers, they get much larger sums for the responsibility alone.

During the time of the alleged delay in the receiver's work, he and his attorneys were laying their plans for future work, which was developed. There is nothing of blame connected with them in this matter, but they are worthy of commendation.

E. B. CRITCHELOW

followed, making the closing argu-
ment for the petitioners. He said
the petition of the school trustees
charged one set of facts and the
court changed the basis upon which
the investigation was held from
them. The first allegation, as to the
sheep being rented at 20 cents when
the customary price was from 40 to
50 cents, had been proven; the next
allegation of the petition was as to
the compromise of the suits, and he
asked for a finding upon this to the
effect that the petition and represen-
tations made to the court were mis-
leading. A great deal of stress had
been laid on the perishable charac-
ter of the goods, but he was of the
opinion that at the time of the com-
promise the property was worth
$200,000, and any persons who took
it after that time were responsible
for it. Their contention was that
no effort was made to find it.

made to witnesses, and upon which they based their estimate, was not a fair statement, and was therefore an intentional suppression of the truth. Mr. Richards, evidence was to be taken with a great deal of allowance. He closed by stating that he would draw up the findings which they asked for and present them on Monday.

An adjournment was taken till 2 p. m. Feb. 18.

The article introduced in evidence by Judge Powers, Feb. 16, from the Tribune of July 11, 1888, reads as follows, with figures in the original article left out:

"A Large Sum Escheated. Receiver Dyer has Recovered a Vast Aggregate. All Sorts of Property Reclaimed. Demands made yesterday and agreements to turn over a total of $790,666.15. Fraudulent transfers.

"Last Saturday when the Tribune published that the Church Farm, valued at $150,000, had been turned over to Receiver Dyer, that bit of exclusive information was the talk of every one on the streets, and the fact that the good Mormon papers did not contain the news caused many of the good Saints to doubt the truth of the surrender, especially as the Bishops had been untiring in their efforts to convince the people that the farm had been sold in good faith to Francis Armstrong.

However, when again yesterday morning $157,666.15 was paid in to the receiver for property fraudulently transferred March 2, 1887, the public seemed to catch its breath as if to say, "That settles it, the receiver has it all now." But not so, as the result of yesterday's search shows that Receiver Dyer's big day was reserved for the last. In fact, yesterday was a red letter day in the receiver's office. During the morning hours a demand was made for the 30,000 head of sheep alleged to have been transferred March 2, 1887, but not delivered until May. A strong kick was made, or rather as strong a kick as could be expected from a dying monster, but availed the monster not. The sheep answered the call and agreed to report at the receiver's fold on a certain date.

Then came a demand for $75,000 worth of cattle transferred in a simMr. Critchelow contended that ilar manner. Another flounder was There are many here who believe, the testimony fully showed that made by the expiring monster, a with Judge Powers, that the escheat there was in existence property struggle, a kick and a surrender of of the property was illegal. It was which the receiver had made no the cattle followed, and hencedisapproved everywhere. Whatever effort to obtain. Judge McBride forth the cowboys will answer to the government got it took by force. affected to be surprised at the mag- Marshal Dyer for the mavericks The Church, in endeavoring to re- nitude of the property recovered. In they brand. tain its property, not only had the his view, it was more surprising that sympathy of its own members, but he didn't get the three millions of a great many others who did not which the Church was said to have. approve the confiscation. The re- Judge Powers' apology that because ceiver worked stealthily, and em- an officer thought a law was harsh ployed an attorney evidently quali- he should be lax in enforcing it was fied for that purpose. Their success a very poor one. He asked for findis one of the marvelous events of the century. They absolutely forced the members of the Church to put their hands into their pockets and pay $25,000 which they said the Church did not own.

Then Mr. Dyer asked for compensation. The word "odium," used by Mr. Auerbach, has a meaning, and

ings as to all the specific charges in
the petition and also that the Re-
ceiver had made claim for $25,000
compensation. In so far as a man
could urge a claim upon a court, the
receiver had urged this claim for
$25,000. He also held that it was
excessive, unsconscionable, and not
made in good faith. The statement

"Owing to the rush of the business and the crowding of the various properties and interests upon the receiver at this time, and further owing to the necessity for him (the receiver) to report at Washington immediately, he took a contract for the delivery of the sheep and cattle on

Sept. 1st. The agreement is signed by responsible parties.

"Still wanting more: Not satisfied with these mortal grips upon the vitals of the monster, Receiver Dyer last evening made another raid with results which simply took from the old structure a large por

tion of the only remaining pins which sustained it. One of these pins were notes aggregating about $27,000 for stock in the Salt Lake Theatre, alleged to have been sold March 2, 1887, the day before the disincorporating act went into effect. The receipt for these notes was given to Le Grand Young, the party who turned them over to Receiver Dyer.

bered that Mr. Jack testified before the examiner that this stock was all divided up and transferred to the various stakes of Zion over the Territory. The Church owned all the stock except a very few shares distributed so as to form the corporation. The distribution was made as claimed Feb. 28, or March, 1887. A bold front secured this also, and as the stock is so scattered as to require several days to call it in, an agreement was handed to the receiver.

changed them to suit my terms RELEASED FROM PRISON.
with those who received sheep from
me; the sheep let to George Farns-
worth were rounded up near Rich-
field.

AT AN early hour on Feb. 21
Apostle George Q. Cannon was re-
To Judge Powers-I cannot state leased from the penitentiary, having
my profits in 1888; I know they ex- served the full two terms of sentence
ceeded $25,000; I actually got the
-less the deduction under the
blanks from Mr. Moffatt, Mr. Dyer's
clerk; the sheep I leased would copper act-imposed upon him for
not exceed in value $1.40 per unlawful cohabitation. His incar-
head; the market was depressed at ceration has covered
a period of
that time, through the tariff agita-
over five months. He has borne
tion; wool advanced three cents per

"Not satisfied with a theatre with ballet dancers and orchestra thrown in, the next dive was for the telegraph stock. It will be remem-pound and sheep 50 cents per head his imprisonment without a murmur after the election; a lease for one and, according to his own testiyear is worth less than one for three mony, has really enjoyed himyears; there were no rams among self. He looks the sheep I leased; I first offered the picture of health Mr. Dyer 18 cents, and he asked 25; and feels accordingly. I am good for the whole num- He appreciates beyond expression ber of sheep I obtained; the fact the privilege of being once more at that I was on his bond was not liberty, not having had, as our thought of; it was a straight business transaction; my friendship for readers are aware, his freedom for Mr. Dyer cut no figure in the ar- the last four years. When this fact rangement; the whole lot of sheep I is considered some idea may be obtained bring to the receiver about 14 per cent of their actual value for formed as to how sweet it is to him the year; I think I was paying all now. they were worth under the circumstances; I expect to make about $8 per hundred; I don't think that too much for my risk; I think it was a close bargain.

"In addition to these properties, ocal beds covering many acres at Grass Creek or Coalville, belonging to the Church, was surrendered. These lands are valuable, having been estimated to be worth over $100,000. This was obtained in the suit against Angus M. Cannon, as Trustee-inTrust.

To Judge Marshall-I get back the original stock and 10 or 12 lambs of the increase, as the contract may

"The property which has passed into the hands of the receiver re- go. cently makes an enormous aggregate. To Judge Powers-There is no In view of the fact that when ap-secret understanding by which Mr. pointed the receiver had offers from Dyer is to gain in the future from prominent attorneys, bankers and the transaction, or to receive any citizens to bet he would not get hold profit; there is no collusion between of $50,000 worth of property, he is to us; I expect to make about $2000 by be congratulated as is his co-worker, my contract. Mr. Peters, in the excellence of the work done.

W. L. PICKARD was in attendance at 2 o'clock Feb. 18, and was called as a witness. He testified-I leased about

It is learned from Brother Cannon that the brethren at the penitentiary are all in fair health and getting along as well as could be expected, considering their circumstances and surroundings.

We understand that President Cleveland pardoned Brother Cannon, the action in that regard having been taken on Monday, Feb. 18. Of course this act on the part of the President was too late to be of any service to the gentleman to whom To Judge Marshall-In most cases it was tendered, so far as lessening the sheep I received were picked out from the flocks; I sublet the sheep his imprisonment is concerned, as from the 27th of September to the the papers have not yet arrived. 10th of October; I sublet While Brother Cannon fully appreprior to the collection; had ciates the kindness and consideraa few applications afterwards, 25,000 Church sheep from Mr. Dyer, my lease from Mr. Dyer runs for tion of the President, he is, we beas receiver; my agreement is fully one year from Oct. 1st; the rental is lieve, perfectly content in completeset out in the lease; Mr. Dyer is not payable on July 1st; I received but ly satisfying the judgment imposed to receive any benefit, directly or 23,087 head, though my lease calls upon him by the court. indirectly, not set out in the lease; 25,550 head; I was to receive the I re-leased the sheep to a number of balance from Mr. Winder, but the parties. (He then gave a list of the Church had not sufficient sheep, parties to whom he had leased the and they have not yet been turned sheep, on terms ranging from one over; that is, however, between me and a half pounds of wool per head and Mr. Winder; in no instance did and 15 lambs per 100, to two and a I find men with more Church sheep half pounds of wool and 10 lambs.) I than the lists called for; I stated so have not received the full number to Mr. Bolivar Roberts. from him; he was to receive no To Judge Powers-Mr. Dyer inbenefit personally from the transac-sisted that the rental be paid on tion; I have been in the sheep busi- July 1, before the contract expired; ness 12 or 15 years; in 1887 the wool he first wanted it in June. business was not good; I did not buy much wool that year, and thus avoided disastrous results; I was prosperous in 1888.

Judge Marshall-What was your loss, Mr. Pickard, in 1887 ?

Objected to by Judge McBride; objection overruled.

Mr. Pickard-I lost about $12,000. Judge Marshall-Did your losses appear to be much larger than than they actually were?

reason

To Judge McBride-A
given by Mr. Dyer to get the money
was that he wanted time to handle
them in case the matter was not
settled by that time.

The whole body of the Latterday Saints in this land and throughout the nations, and many other friends, will rejoice when they learn of the liberation from imprisonment of Apostle George Q. Cannon, whose life, from early boyhood, has been prominently and ably devoted to the advancement of the cause of truth. We join with them in congratulating him upon the auspicious event of the day, Feb. 21st, 1889, a most important one to him and many others.

Judge Powers-That is all. Judge Marshall-That is all. The investigation was ended, after Seek to bring forth and establish thirteen days' delving on the part of able attorneys, among witnesses my Zion. Keep my commandments from all parts of the country. The in all things; and, if you keep my public will be glad that this phase of commandments and endure to the the question is past, and will pa- end, you shall have eternal life, tiently await the opening of a new chapter in this important suit for which gift is the greatest of all the the confiscation of the Church prop- gifts of God.

Objected to; objection sustained. Mr. Pickard, continuing My business was quite prosperous in 1888; my contracts were made on leases obtained from Mr. Dyer; I erty.

-Doc. and Cov.

The Deseret Weekly.

PUBLISHED BY

SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH.

herent.

That right is that no citi-cates that if they had the opportunzen, or class of people, shall be de-ity of doing so they would make prived of property except by due the spoliation of this people complete, even if it should reduce them to penury.

THE DESERET NEWS COMPANY, process of law, by the operation of legal enactments which bear equally upon all classes of citizens, without distinction.

SUBSCRIPTION PRICE:

Per Year, of Fifty-two Numbers,
Per Volume, of Twenty-six Numbers,

[merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small]
[ocr errors][merged small][merged small]

February 23, 1889.

A CONSISTENT STAND.

THE argument made Feb. 12 by United States District Attorney Hobson, of Colorado, in behalf of the Government, before the Supreme Court of the Territory, in the Church case, created a profound sensation. To those who are in favor of consistency and fair dealing it must have afforded much satisfaction. Perhaps this gratification would be derived more from the prevailing sentiment than the matter of the speech, although both were decidedly good.

The idea which permeated his ennunciations indicated that the government did not view with favor the taking, by doubtful legislative process, "a large amount of property from a church." This is made perfectly clear when it is considered that Mr. Hobson not only represented the department of justice of the government, but set forth its views, his statement on the subject being to that effect. Expressed in so many words, the government says, through Mr. Hobson, "We do not propose to allow, so far as we are concerned, any pronounced or ultra proceedings against the defendant until we know we are right. This government has not gone into the business of robbery, and does not propose to permit it so far as it can be prevented."

We repeat what we have heretofore stated in this particular, that Judging from the whole tenor of such a disposition to grab and deMr. Hobson's argument, it would spoil has never been associated with appear to be seriously doubted that or displayed in any legal proceedthe Supreme Court of the Unitedings in any civilized country under States will sustain a law of the na- heaven in modern times, and all ture of the one which is directly aimed at one class of citizens, and therefore belongs to the department of class legislation. Enactments of that kind cannot be permitted to remain upon the statute books of our nation without endangering the very existence of our institutions. When the rights of one portion of the citizens are ruthlessly threatened by one-sided legislation, the rights of the whole are thereby jeopardized, the general safety of the people being imperilled.

those who have taken part in it as against those whom they esteemed defenseless, will in consequence carry upon them the brand of everlasting shame and disgrace. It is a species of dishonesty and tyranny that is utterly without excuse. It evinces this fact that if these characters should obtain the consummation of their desires, by having the reins of local government fully in their grasp, they would bring about a condition of things in this Territory that no people having a There is one point that should be spark of independence of characspecially remembered by those who ter in them would endure for any are clamoring for the seizure of length of time. They would beevery scrap and particle of property come the victims of wrong, of alleged to belong to the defendant. tyranny, and of oppression the like of While they are laying "the flatter- which would have no parallel in the ing unction to their souls" that they history of this country; and nothing are simply robbing the "Mormon" that even the colonists had to unpeople because they appear to be dergo under the reign of a British helpless, it may transpire before this monarch, and against which the affair is done with that they have fathers of our nation arose in revoluplaced themselves in the role of de- tion, would equal it. This people, spoilers of the national treasury. it will yet be discovered, are too While they may anticipate perpetrat- brave, independent, and detering a wrong of that kind against an mined ever to submit to such a conunpopular people, they may dis-dition of things. Those who would cover that they have reckoned with-inaugurate it imagine probably that out their host if they fall into the as they have done in the past so hands of the government.

This point is plainly set forth by the injunction pronounced by Mr. Hobson regarding the care that should be exhibited in holding sacred the body of the fund in the hands of the receiver, and meeting contingent expenses with the proceeds arising from its being in his

they could in the future, to a more aggravated extent, carry on their villainy with impunity under an incubus of falsehood, with which they have covered the country, against an innocent people, and caused them to be unpopular.

As sure as the pri nciple of justice is eternal and finally claims its own, although at times slow in its

This is in harmony with the genius of the compromise that was made, that the whole subject might be brought at the earliest practic-possession. able date before the Supreme Court We have already shown the nec-operations, it will overtake tyrants, of the United States that it might essity for this, and manifested the oppressors and thieves, and they be decided by that tribunal whether fact beyond the possibility of sucany part of the operation against cessful contradiction that encroachthe property of the defendant is ments upon the property are without legal. The spirit indicated by the the authority of law or of right. department is beyond question. As Hence we have taken exceptions to we have before stated, there should the action of the Supreme Court of be, pending the final adjudication this Territory in setting apart or apof the matter, practically a cessation propriating from that fund $500 for of hostilities against those whose the payment of witnesses called toproperty has been taken under a gether to give testimony in the unlaw which invades a natural and seemly side-show scramble that has consequently constitutional right been inaugurated in connection a right that never was conferred, with this case by those who have neither can it be, because it is in- evinced a disposition which indi-be the church of the devil.-Doc.a.Cov.

will be relegated to the sphere to which by their groveling and de- ' testable instincts they properly belong. These are the individuals against whom the majority of the people of Utah have strong reasons to complain;and, in their behalf, we propose to vindicate truth and justice, and to protest against wrong, oppression and dishonesty, so long as we can lift a voice or wield a pen.

Contend against no church, save it

THE CONCESSION.

THE clear and unequivocal testimony which was given yesterday by Hon. F. S. Richards, before Examiner Harkness, let considerable light into the character of the arrangement that has been denominated "a compromise." The statements made by that gentleman harmonized exactly with those of Mr. Le Grande Young in his evidence. It is placed beyond doubt by what has been enunciated that the socalled compromise was, in reality,

The following is an excerpt from the article in question:

ing liable to censure from the cor- a part of what was stated at that
morants who have instituted the time will bear repeating.
proceedings against them, those
"active politicians" should, to be
consisteut, call a meeting and pass
in relation to them a hearty and
unanimous vote of thanks. They
have been guilty, according to the
evidence, of the very opposite of
what the "active politicians"
charged them with. They have
been in the same business as they
themselves have been desirous of
engaging in.

The understanding of the counsel no compromise at all, being a of the defendant has been and is one-sided affair. It has brought that the consummation of the arconspicuously forward a point rangement which has been called a which we have all along been compromise meant a cessation of making, to the effect that the sole efforts to seize other property. It is aim of the parties pursued has been understood, as enunciated by Mr. to obtain a final decree, which was Richards, that such was the view repeatedly asked for and as repeat- of the acting Attorney General. edly, on various technicalities, re- That high official has not manifused. What has been termed "a fested the unreasonable and grasp compromise" was entered into by ing genius that has been displayed the defendant, because that was the in such a glaring way locally. only method by which the other side could be brought to an agreement to allow a final decree to be entered to enable the case to be carried to the Supreme Court, where the object in view might be reached. It has been called "a compromise" all round, because it had to take some name; but that was a misnomer.

It appears that the matter of the Washakie farm was brought up in conference on the subject with the Solicitor General. When it was explained to him that that tract of land was used for the purpose of "humanizing Indians," he expressed himself to the effect that the property named should stand as it is for the present. The ground for this position was that it could not be utilized for a better purpose.

Suppose a gentleman known in this region of country as a road agent sets out on a business venture In view of the proceedings of the in pursuance of his profession. He "active politicians" who have meets a stage coach and presents at evinced such deep anxiety to take the head of the driver a double- away from an "intensely religious" barrelled shotgun and says, "Hand people their property, would it not out that treasure box or you will be well to establish a farm or some lose the top of your head!" The public institution whose express obdriver rejoins, "I would prefer to go ject shall be the "humanizing" of on to the next station and see that class? They need "humanwhether we cannot have this diffi-izing" very much. Those who unculty between you and me ar- dertook such a gigantic labor would ranged." The gentlemanly agent find the task more difficult than the answers, "No; the treasure box, or reformation of the simple savage of you cannot go any further." See- the desert. The civilized antiing that there is no alternative, the "Mormon" savage is less hapless driver hands out the valu

ables.

Surely such a transaction would hardly be designated "a compromise." It was "fish or cut bait."

"Mr. Hobson struck a keynote in that respect, when he broadly intimated that political ax-grinding had more to do with the matter than a love for the interests of education. Weight is given to this idea when it is considered that although excessive fees had been asked for, the granting of these demands was in the hands of the court, in whom the would-be intervenors do not appear to exhibit much confidence.

"The political phase of this proceeding is also borne out by the fact that the filing of Judge Zane is in the nature of an assault upon the honesty of the Receiver and his attorneys, and necessarily of the Attorney-General of the United States. it too much to expect that there In view of recent political events, is should be a disposition in certain quarters to both produce and hasten desired official changes? Is it out of possibility that when it rains official the way also to have an idea of the porridge certain parties should be standing ready with their dishes top-side up? Why the Republican organ which has gone neck and heels in support of this latest phase of the robbery of a Church has already nominated Judge Zane and others for certain federal offices in this Territory. Is it otherwise than to be expected that efforts should be made to float the candidates into the seats for which they have been named?

"Men who have occupied positions of trust and emolument find it exceedingly inconvenient to be dropped out. Judge Zane has discovered this. He said as much during his presentation of his side of the question in court now considered. He has been hurt, and doubtless feels some degree of resentment."

The truth of the foregoing is being gradually but slowly exhibited. If Judge Powers had been permitted to interrogate Mr. Whittemore, who as an attorney has been in the employ of the trustees, and Captain Bailey, one of the trustees adjudged in contempt, he doubtless would have proved what he stated was his sus-intention to show had he not been

ceptible to "humanizing" influences

than he.

prevented by adverse rulings of Examiner Harkness. We direct the attention of our readers on this department of the subject to what transpired in the investigation Feb. 14.

Judge Powers asserted that if allowed he would demonstrate that the whole movement was entirely of a political character, and that the

POLITICAL JUGGLERY. The Receiver and his attorneys IN THE incipient stage of the sidemade a demand of the defendant show scramble after "a large amount to hand over to Mr. Dyer certain of property taken from a Church," property, amounting to about $25,- we expressed our views in relation 000 more than the Church pos- to its true inwardness. The opinion sessed. To accede to this "uncon- of the NEWS on this matter was pretended solicitude for the protecscionable" demand was the only enunciated in an article that apmeans by which the defendant peared in the issue of November could reach the next station. It 30th. In consequence of what will be seen then that instead of transpired Feb. 14 in the investithe Receiver and his attorneys be- gation before Examiner Harkness, catspaws manipulated by certain

tion of the school fund was the veriest hypocrisy; that the trustees whose names appeared upon the petition for intervention were simply.

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »