THE 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 A man man would not have done. has got a right to place his own The value on his own services. 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. the DESERET WEEKLY. misled the court, when he had Zion received for tithing, a lot of If was included in those lists. These nothing whatever to do with the trash, and everything of that kind, roatter placed before the court. court was misled, it was lists were used for the transfer to But the Stakes. Outside of the current by itself, and by no one else. 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 propchange in his opinion. Certainly erty was, is that the government The Church no one would now say Judge Zane got $25,000 more than the whole would be in an impartial frame of thing was worth. mind, considering the feeling that gave $25,000 more than they had, The compromise not to conceal property, but to get has grown up. 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 aucparties 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 exnot 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 beSuppose he had brought suits, who error. Right here in this case, lead-yond possibility for him to get it. ing counsel disagree, and shall Mr. 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 Now the that he could not. He had to look neys, and if there was any miscon- a single sheep? It was well known duct it was on them. How tion, and they would not give any. effort is being made to place that to adversaries for his whole informamisconduct on Mr. Dyer. much justice is there in that, when He gathered his information little Mr. Williams and Mr. Peters are al- by little. Everybody would have Nothing is said condemned any other course on his lowed to go free? of them but the consequences of part. The point of the whole thing is Is this that there was a suspicion that their inistakes, if such they were, If he the defendants were trying to save An insinuation are to be saddled upon him. there any fairness in that? had got only 25 per cent of the prop- their property. erty on the advice of his attorneys, that the receiver was aiding in that respon-caused this investigation, which has shown that there is not a suggestion they and not he were sible. Judge McBride then took up the to form a basis for that insinuation. sheep question, sustaining Mr. Dyer There is no ground for the shadow in the good rental he secured for a of a suspicion, yet that is the whole lot of scrubby sheep, such as the point of the case. Mr. Richards deto be, clares emphatically that the sole testimony showed these The Church surand at a time when the sheep pros-object of the surrender was to forward the case. pects were discouraging. Mr. Dyer was not a sheepman, rendered more property than it had. JUDGE M'BRIDE, who said the results of the investiga- but he obtained all the information The government, instead of being tion were important to the respond- he could, and took the best terms he defrauded, have got every dollar, The attorney ents in this investigation. Serious could find. It was known for two and more too, than it should have. charges were made against them, months that he would have sheep, As to the Stake properties, these and they were called here to an- yet none of these men who were an- are still in dispute. The investigation has about xious to pay 40 or 50 cents per head of the government made arrangeis holding back, closed, and now the counsel for were heard of when the sheep were ments for the settlement of the that the to be rented. The contract was constitutionality of the law. The the court only ask examiner find that the court was fair and reasonable. Even if a mis- government take had been made, it is no evi- and these men are hounding Mr. unintentionally misled. mit that there has been no bad dence of bad faith, misconduct, or Dyer to go ahead. What is he to for censuring the Let the test now being made be defaith. If the court did not have wilful negligence. It might be do? Just what his counsel says: sufficient information it had the an Nothing Supreme Court because it had termined, that he can see his way means of securing more. If you had told men who knew 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 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 me that he alone is to be censured matter of great surprise that he got parties agreed upon a basis of compromise, 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 reFor keen, close, sucpresentations that were made as to to censure Mr. Dyer for contracts sisted at every step. 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. parties agree; the court generally there is a flaw in them. Whether cessful management, considering of property was never wrung from 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. As to the $268,000 worth of prop-any people, and it is grossly unjust to impute wrong to him. ment. The gentlemen engaged for the government, say that today they erty, what did it consist of? Everything from a broken-down cradle in consider the settlement a fair one. which children were rocked 25 years ago to the finest blooded horse that 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 argument in behalf of the respondents was made by swer. They ad It would be a gross injustice to charge the receiver with having excuse The returns I agree with Mr. Richards that it was no compromise to give $75,000 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. when Mr. Dyer wrung property from Then the hounds began to bay at 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 argument for the petitioners. He said the petition of the school trustees charged one set of facts and the court changed the basis upon which There is not a line of testimony the investigation was held from to show that Mr. Dyer kept any- them. The first allegation, as to the thing secret. It all got into the sheep being rented at 20 cents when newspapers, and much more than the customary price was from 40 to should have been. The court or- 50 cents, had been proven; the next dinarily trusts its officer, and I think allegation of the petition was as to it ought to, for attorneys are usually the compromise of the suits, and he honest. There is nothing to show asked for a finding upon this to the that a word was said to mislead any-effect that the petition and represenbody. I agree with Mr. Richards, tations made to the court were misthat it Mr. Dyer had endeavored to leading. A great deal of stress had get the property in the way the peti- been laid on the perishable charactioners suggest, they would have got ter of the goods, but he was of the nothing out of it. There would opinion that at the time of the comhave been no property to quarrel promise the property was worth over. Every man connected with $200,000, and any persons who took the taking of the property has it after that time were responsible worked energetically, and if any for it. Their contention was that one should grumble it should be the no effort was made to find it. defendants. There are many here who believe, with Judge Powers, that the escheat of the property was illegal. It was disapproved everywhere. Whatever the government got it took by force. The Church, in endeavoring to retain its property, not only had the sympathy of its own members, but of a great many others who did not approve the confiscation. The receiver worked stealthily, and employed an attorney evidently qualified for that purpose. Their success is 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 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: Re "A Large Sum Escheated. ceiver 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. the cattle followed, and henceforth the cowboys will answer to Marshal Dyer for the mavericks they brand. Then came a demand for $75,000 worth of cattle transferred in a simMr. Critchelow contended that ilar manner. Another flounder was the testimony fully showed that made by the expiring monster, a there was in existence property struggle, a kick and a surrender of which the receiver had made no effort to obtain. Judge McBride affected to be surprised at the magnitude of the property recovered. In his view, it was more surprising that he didn't get the three millions which the Church was said to have. Judge Powers' apology that because an officer thought a law was harsh he should be lax in enforcing it was a very poor one. He asked for findings as to all the specific charges in the petition and also that the Receiver 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. changed them to suit my terms RELEASED FROM PRISON. self. AT AN early hour on Feb. 21 Apostle George Q. Cannon was reTo 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"Not satisfied with a theatre with head; the market was depressed at ceration has covered a period of ballet dancers and orchestra thrown that time, through the tariff agitaover five months. He has borne in, the next dive was for the tele- tion; wool advanced three cents per graph 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 He looks the sheep I leased; I first offered the picture of Mr. Dyer 18 cents, and he asked 25; health 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 thought of; it was a straight business transaction; my friendship for Mr. Dyer cut no figure in the arrangement; the whole lot of sheep obtained bring to the receiver about 14 per cent of their actual value for the year; I think I was paying all 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. 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. "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 our readers are aware, his freedom for the last four years. When this fact is considered some idea may be formed as to how sweet it is to him now. 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. ciates the kindness and considera tion of the President, he is, we believe, perfectly content in completely satisfying the judgment imposed upon him by the court. 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. of 10th October; I sublet While Brother Cannon fully appreprior to the collection; had a few applications afterwards, 25,000 Church sheep from Mr. Dyer, my lease from Mr. Dyer runs for as receiver, my agreement is fully one year from Oct. 1st; the rental is set out in the lease; Mr. Dyer is not payable on July 1st; I received but to receive any benefit, directly or 23,087 head, though my lease calls 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 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 deity 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, IN ADVANCE. CHARLES W. PENROSE, Saturday, $2.50. EDITOR. February 23, 1889. A CONSISTENT STAND. 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 those who have taken part in it as aimed at one class of citizens, and against those whom they esteemed therefore belongs to the department defenseless, will in consequence carry THE argument made Feb. 12 of class legislation. Enactments of upon them the brand of everlasting by United States District Attorney that kind cannot be permitted to shame and disgrace. It is a species Hobson, of Colorado, in behalf of remain upon the statute books of of dishonesty and tyranny that is the Government, before the Supreme | our nation without endangering the utterly without excuse. It evinces Court of the Territory, in the very existence of our institutions. this fact-that if these characters Church case, created a profound | When the rights of one portion of should obtain the consummation of sensation. To those who are in the citizens are ruthlessly threaten- their desires, by having the reins of ed by one-sided legislation, the local government fully in their rights of the whole are thereby jeo-grasp, they would bring about a conpardized, the general safety of the people being imperilled. 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. There is one point that should be specially remembered by those who are clamoring for the seizure of dition of things in this Territory that no people having a spark of independence of character in them would endure for any length of time. They would become the victims of wrong, of tyranny, and of oppression the like of which would have no parallel in the history of this country; and nothing that even the colonists had to undergo under the reign of a British monarch, and against which the 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. The idea which permeated his en-every scrap and particle of property nunciations indicated that the gov- alleged to belong to the defendant. ernment did not view with favor the While they are laying "the flattertaking, by doubtful legislative pro- ing unction to their souls" that they cess, "a large amount of property are simply robbing the "Mormon" from a church." This is made per- people because they appear to be fectly clear when it is considered helpless, it may transpire before this that Mr. Hobson not only represent-affair is done with that they have ed 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." 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 possession. 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. This is in harmony with the genius of the compromise that was As sure as the principle of jusmade, that the whole subject might tice is eternal and finally claims its be brought at the earliest practicown, although at times slow in its 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 suc- will be relegated to the sphere to any 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. which by their groveling and detestable 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 DESERET WEEKLY. 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, no compromise at all, being a one-sided affair. It has brought conspicuously which we 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 "Mr. Hobson struck a keynote in that respect, when he broadly intimated that political ax-grinding had love for the interests of education. more to do with the matter than a 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 would-be intervenors do not apthe hands of the court, in whom pear to exhibit much confidence. "The political phase of this proceeding is also borne out by the fact the nature of an assault upon the that the filing of Judge Zane is in honesty of the Receiver and his at The understanding of the counsel of the defendant has been and is that the consummation of the arforward a point rangement which has been called have all along been compromise meant a cessation of torneys, and necessarily of the At making, to the effect that the sole aim of the parties pursued has been to obtain a final decree, which was repeatedly asked for and as repeatedly, on various technicalities, refused. What has been termed "a compromise" was entered into by the defendant, because that was the 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 It has been called "a reached. compromise" all round, because it had to take some name; but that was a misnomer. a efforts to seize other property. It is In view of recent political events, is torney-General of the United States. it too much to expect that there should be a disposition in certain quarters to both produce and hasten the way also to have an idea of the desired official changes? Is it out of possibility that when it rains official porridge certain parties should be standing ready with their dishes top-side up? Why the Republican heels in support of this latest phase organ which has gone neck and of the robbery of a Church has already nominated Judge Zane and this Territory. Is it otherwise than others for certain federal offices in of to be expected that efforts should be made to float the candidates into the seats for which they have been named? be "Men who have occupied positions of trust and emolument find it exceedingly inconvenient to dropped out. Judge Zane has dising his presentation of his side of covered this. He said as much durthe question in court now considered. He has been hurt, and doubtless feels some degree of resentment.” It appears that the matter of the Washakie farm was brought up in conference on the subject with the When it was Solicitor General. explained to him that that tract of land was used for the purpose "humanizing Indians," he expressed himself to the effect that the property named should stand as it is for the present. The ground for this Suppose a gentleman known in position was that it could not be this region of country as a road utilized for a better purpose. who have agent sets out on a business venture In view of the proceedings of the in pursuance of his profession. He "active politicians" 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" The truth of the foregoing is bebarrelled 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 ob- ing gradually but slowly exhibited. driver rejoins, "I would prefer to go ject shall be the "humanizing" of If Judge Powers had been permitThey need "human- ted to interrogate Mr. Whittemore, on to the next station and see that class? whether we cannot have this diffi- izing" very much. Those who un- who as an attorney has been in the ar-dertook such a gigantic labor would employ of the trustees, and Captain culty between you and ranged." The gentlemanly agent find the task more difficult than the Bailey, one of the trustees adjudged answers, "No; the treasure box, or reformation of the simple savage of in contempt, he doubtless would The civilized anti- have proved what he stated was his sus-intention to show had he not been you cannot go any further." See- the desert. ing that there is no alternative, the "Mormon" hapless driver hands out the valu- ceptible to "humanizing” influences prevented by adverse rulings of ables. me Surely such a transaction would hardly be designated "a comproIt was "fish or cut bait." mise." 000 than he. savage is less POLITICAL JUGGLERY. We direct Examiner Harkness. the attention of our readers on this department of the subject to what transpired the investigation Feb. 14. in IN THE incipient stage of the sideThe Receiver and his attorneys Judge Powers asserted that if almade a demand of the defendant show scramble after "a large amount to hand over to Mr. Dyer certain of property taken from a Church," lowed he would demonstrate that property, amounting to about $25,- we expressed our views in relation the whole movement was entirely of more than the Church pos- to its true inwardness. The opinion a political character, and that the 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 ap- tion of the school fund was the the defendant peared in the issue of November veriest hypocrisy; that the trustees means by which It 30th. In consequence of what whose names appeared upon the pecould reach the next station. will be seen then that instead of transpired Feb. 14 in the investi- tition for intervention were simply the Receiver and his attorneys be- gation before Examiner Harkness, catspaws manipulated by certain |