OCR Text |
Show THB INTEE-OCE AN OH THE ANN ELIZA CASE. The Chicago Inter-Ocean of Nov. 10th comments on Judge Boreman'e order imprisoning Brighani Young for contempt, sustaining Borcman's order, as it did that of Judge Mc-Kcan Mc-Kcan on the eanio question, doubtless doubt-less upon the principle in vogue among politicians, to support their party, right ,or wrong. It. however, brings no arguments or precedents to enforce Judge Boreman, but simply gives its own re-assurance that there need be no lear of a legal recognition . of polygamy from Judge Borcman's order, adding. Of course when the case shall come to trial, Dd it shall be known that either of tho parties bad a husband or wife '' Hying at tho time of such umod, tho suit in iU present shape must be dismissed. Thia is all there appears to be in the McKcan-Boreman trick in the Ann Eliza case. The judges allow tho fraudulent assurationa of this woman against her own publio admissions, ad-missions, and against tho knowledge of the whole community, the two judges included, in Older simply to fleece Brinhnrn Young. Judge Bore-man Bore-man labors through four or five newspaper columns to controvert Judge Lowe'a decision; but does not touch the gist of it, which is that the record of the case discloses for the purposo of tho present inquiry tbo uncontradicted fact that the alleged m&rriago was ft bigamous or polygamous mum ago. If such a marriage mar-riage was entered into igooranlly by the complainant, and through tha fraud of tho defendant, equity will open its doors (or her rebel; but upon the cuso as it (Unds, itis not, id the judgment of the court, according to the piinciplcs of equity and good conscience to onlorce th formal payment of ad interim uli- mony. It appears from tho record re-cord that tho alleged marriago wu celebrated in this city, that the plaintiff and defendant both ni3ido in this city. It cannot, therefore, be a difficult or expensive- duty for the pliun-Litl' pliun-Litl' to placo upon the record ft confutation confuta-tion oi tho unexampled and mont extraordinary extra-ordinary allegation made, if any just explanation exi?t3, and tho court believes be-lieves Hi at Huch explanation is due to the common principles of equity and public justice boforejprodcoeding further in the direction sought. It would t strange, jndeud, if upon such a stale of facts un-controverted un-controverted by any rule of pleading or of law, and unextenuated by any evidence, evi-dence, it could ba imposed as a duty upon a court of equity to direct or enforce en-force tho paymont of alimony, and Uiiih bestow the apparent, if not indeed the real sanction of tho law bp mi a practice which is hostile to the civilization of the age, and which the penal sUtutos of the land visit with condign puniihrnent. Judge Borcman's longopinion does not reply to this Btatoment of facta, but on lho contrary is devoted to proving that the Btatus of Ann Eliza before the court ia prociaoly that of any other married woman who might apply for a divorce. Has a court the right for the purposes of a trial to assume as-sume that what it knows to be white ia black? The pleadings of the defendant de-fendant in this case are reinforced by notorious facts, known to all lho world, and admitted by all the parties to the cause, and which can only be denied by the oxorcUo of tho urU of petti fogery in which thoao members of of the legal fraternity known as "shysters" excel. Wo do not wonder that loading members of tho Suit Lake bar (Jontilos of tho Gentiles who would bo very glad to havo Brii-hamYouug'a Brii-hamYouug'a coffors depleted, freely i wort that Ann Eliza has no cono, f 1 |