OCR Text |
Show THE SUIT, FOR DIYOllCE. , Yesterday ikerocratic Conventions were held at Columbus, Ohh; Springfield, Illinois, and Pittsbufg, Venn. They advoe-'.tc- speedy resumption of gold and silver as the basis of curren- cy, individual liberty, opposition to MnBptuaty laws, mid to e&ceutive or legislative intermeddling with the affairs of society whereby nonojrolics irc fostered and personal freedom retrained, and the right of the State to protect its citizens from the extortions of chartered monopolies. They protested against the exem-tiof bonds from taxation, land grants to corporations, the press-galaw, and the third term principle and favor the restriction of the Presidency to one term nod invite d! Democrats lojoin in expelling the Republican party from power. If the Democratic party, with a jbtfurui to suit the times, can form the Grangers, coalition with a ihcy will stand some chance of a victory ' at ' the next presiBut if they dential election. Mick to the old issues and rely on the old name, although the republican party is rent in twain, they will Had themselves at the bottom of the poll, list andiu a worse fix than they were in the last defeat. n g - , A 1VOUTII LESS . COMMIS- SI OX, !. - '.. ;..''.v Defendant .:, . Answer. a ; - Following is a correct copy, filed on Tuesday evening, of President Brigbam Young's answer to the complaint of Ann Eliza, through Maxwell. The suit' was comnver.ced ra the Third District Court, July 28th, 1873. A demurrer to the jurisdiction of the court was filed, and Judge Emerson, who sat in the place of Judge McKean, sustained the demurrer. Subsequently the Supreme Court of the Territoiy ruled that the District Court baa original jurisdiction of divorce matters. The suit now stands ready for trial In the District Court, Third Judicial District of the Territory of Utah, County of Salt Lake. Ann Eliza Young, by her next friend, George R. Maxwell, Plaintiff, vt. Brig, bam Young, Defendant." Answer. Now comes the said defendant, Brig-haYoung, and for answer to the bill of complaint of the said Ann Eliza Young, plaintiff, denies (bat on the sixth day of April, 18G8, at the County of Salt Lake, Utah Territory, or at any other time or place, this defendunt and the lid plaintiff intermarried, or that since that time, or at any time, the said plaintiff lias been, or that she now is the wife of this defendant. For this defendant, on information and - belief, alleges that before that time, on the lOih day of April, 18C3, at Salt Lake City. Utah Territory, the said plaintiff was married to one James L Dee, who is still living, and that ever since the said tenth day of April, 18G3, the said plaintiff has been, and on the said sixth day of April, 1808, was, and still is the lawful wife of the said James L. Dee, never, as this defendant is now advised and believes, having been divorced from the said James L. Dee. But this defendant further says, that on the sixth day of April, 1808, and at the time of the ceremony hereinafter referred to, he was informed and then verily believed that the plaintiff had, prior to that time, been legally divorced from the said James L. Dee. And the defendant further answering alleges, that at the town of Kirtland, in the State of Ohio, on the tenth day of m to-wi- t, The Tooele County case is still on trial. Yesterday, when L. A. Brown, the claimant for the Probate Judge-thi- p was asked for evidence of his flection, he produced a commission January, A. D. 1834, this defendant being then an unmarried man. was duly from the Governor; that and nothing and l, lawfully married to Mary Ann Counsel for the defence obmore. by a minister of the gospel, who was then and there, by the laws of said jected, showing that it was not evi- State, authorized to solemnize mardence of election, and quoting a law riages. ' And that the said marriage was then of Congress on the Fubject. Of course and there fully consummated, and that the aaid Mary Ann Angell, who is still this objection was overruled. living, then and there became, and ever Isn't Woods, formerly of Orcgou, since has been, and still is, the lawful a uice Governor? He issues a com- wife of this defendant, all of which said mission to this man, Brown, without facts the said complainant on the said sixth day of April, 18G8. and for a long time prior thereto, had full knowledge Dy documentary evidence of his elecand information. ; ) because he was '!;.', tion, simply supported But defendant says that he aBd the by a clique it would bo folly to call said complainant were on the sixth day them a party of which the Gover- of April, 1868, members of the said Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-da- y nor is cno of the chief Saints, and that it was a doctrine and An-gel- stump-rpcakcr- s. belief of said Church 'that members thereof might rightfully enter into plural Justly and legally the commission or celestial marriages. And defendant admits that on the is of no more value than a copy of sixth day of April .1868, at Salt Lake the sheet that lies daily for the City, Utah Territory, in accordance with, and pursuant to, the said doctrine, cusand Govthat the clique, considering tom and belief of the said Church, a ernor knew the election was to be ceremony ,ws performed to' unito the contested, the issuance of the papcr plaintiff and defendant in what is was extraofficial and exceedingly known as sucrTplural or celestial said first wife of this defendant foolish. being then iivjug and undivprced, as plain'iff then and there well knew. But denies that on the said sixth THE WORK Or DAS- defendant of April, or at an other time: he day TARDS. anJ the said plaintiff intermarried iu any other or different sense or inauner than The S. L. Tribune perpetrated an- that above admitted and set forth. , Deother of its outrages yesterday in fendant further alleges that the said complainant was then informed by the publishing the "answer" of President defendant and then and there well Young in such a shape that a false knew that by reason of sai"d marriage in the manner aforesaid, she could not impression was created. Sensational have and need not expect the society or s were interpolated and mix- personal attention of this defendant, as ed in with the text f the answer in in the ordinary relation between husband and wife. ffn.r , tuch a way as to make them part of Defendant denies that abit : J year the document., These' abuses of the after the said alleged Wrriage wiih plaintiff, or at any other time, defendliving and defamers of the dead who ant commenced or practiced towards the edit the Daily Dirt &lingtr arc as said plaintiff a systematic, or any course of neglect or unkindncss, or cruel or utterly destitute of honor and deccucy inhuman treatment, or that at tho said time defendant commenced or practised a:; they are of shame and toward the said plaintiff a systemrJio or A correct copy of the answer will any course of negleot or unkindness, wr cruel or inhuman treatment,endtbg iu au be found in t day's JUNCTION. absolute desertion of her or otherwise. '. But oa the contrry, this ' defendant A WISE MOVE, w alleges that he has always, and at all times treated the said plaintiff with, due Jack Barns would m 4k e, a s kindness and consideration. Defendant denies that during the year Sheriff for Uinta Oountyj W. 1809, or at any time, he constrained the T II is many friends want him to cnmplainantagainst her. express n wishes or remonsuance, to remove to a farm, run for the "posish." But Jack is belonging to defendant,, situated, Jour nr.sible as well, us true, and stands wiles from 'Salt Lake City,' or to" remove any place against, her wishes. .. v lack in favor of Wm. Ilinton, the to ' IMeudAntdeaie that during aU the People's nominee, desiring to sec a time, or any cf the"tHieaidplaintiffc-sidtj- j on' his farm, she.wjs compelled to g"od man elected, and not wishing to perform, or under, tie' necessity of per- -' divide the vote and thus play iuto forming, menial services In order to obthe hands of the lniapable incum- tain the necessafy means "subsistence, ' or for any purpose. bent. Jack's move Bums the CW.Y. At :i y.Vt mar-riage;t- j , , Lead-Hue- ' self-respec- t. first-clas- , trieatnoaci'pattDs'ihc be said plaintiff, may bare had with her her sojourn on tbe sua ittrm, u during her complaint mentioned, this defenuani is unable to state. But he denies that he ever prohibited her frem having, or forbade lieif to have other or different companions with her besides her mother. Defendant denies that he did, after the inmotbeT of "the said plaintiff became firm and unable to render assistance to said plaintiff.or at any time object to her a comremaining longer on the place as the to otherwise or plaintiff. panion Defendant denies that during his visits to the said farm while the plain ti ft resided thereon, he treated the plaintiff with studied neglect or contempt, or any neglect or contempt, or that he intentionally gave her to understand, or thai be gave her any cause to understand or infer that his visits were not for her, but for the purpose of supervising the work on the farm. But defendant says at all such times and at all other times, he treated said plaintiff with kindness and pave to her us much attention as was consistent with defendant's duties. Defendant denins that dunne all )T any of the time while plaintiff resided on defendant's farm, she was restricted to the coarsest and moxt meagre or to coarse or meagre fare, vr that from neceesity she bad to dress in a manner w holly unsuitable, or at. all un suitable "to her Btatiou and position in life." But on the contrary, defendant alleges that durin? all of said time said plaintiff was provided by this defendant with pleaty of food and clothing and means to keep the said plaintiff and her family as well provided for and as ele gantly dressed as was usual or consi9 tent with the simple manners and customs of the country at that time. De fendant admits that in the fall of 1872, he provided a residence for the said plaintiff in Salt Lake City and that she resided in said City, in defendant's house from that time until on or about the fifteenth day of July, A. D. 1873, at which last mentioned time defendant suys that the said plaintiff voluntarily and without his knowledge or consent and without any cause for fear or vio lenee or hostility or vindictiveness from defendant did leave, desert and abandon uetennanl s bouse ana premises, since which time plaintiff has not solicited any aid or assistance from the defendant nor has he given her any. Defendant denies that plaintiff was constrained by her destitution or feeble health or fear of violence from the bos tility or vindictive disposition of de fendant to vacate said house, But alleges that while she resided there he provided her with ample means to live upon, and that he never by word or otherwise gave the plaintiff any reason to fear that he would treat her with violence, or otherwise than with kindness and consideration. Defendant denies that tince plaintiff's residence in Salt Lake City, after the fall of 1872, he had wholly absented himself from complain ant, or refused to visit her at her domi cile. But alleges the fact to be that during said time and during tho year last past, before the filing of the complaint herein, defendant visaed the said plaintiff at her domicile at different times and as frequently us defendant's duties would admit. Defendant admits that plaintiff has and did during the year aforesaid, frequently call upou him at another house occupied by him in Salt Lake City, and request him to furnish her witti articles uecessary for her uiainten ance or the means to procure them, but defendant denies that in answer to her said solicitations or any of them or at any time he used towards her opprobri-- i ous and most offensive language or or probrieus or offensive language in any degree. Defendant denies that the articles fur nished the said plaintiff by him since the Tall of 1872 were not sufficient in quality and quantity for her subsistence and that, of her d pendent children. But avers that during all of said' time and at all times until said plaintiff left his house as aforesaid, he furnished her with ample means to support herself and family. Defendant denies that during said time Or any part thereof plaintiff was forced to do, or was under the necessity of doing constant or severe manual labor in order to procure the of life forherself and children. Although defendant admits that plaintiff may have necessarily perforated some labor during that time in the management of her domestic affairs. Defendant denies that plaintiff has frequently or at all commnnicated t him; or that he is or was aware of the fact lhat the plaintiff had for the last four years, or lor any considerable part thereof, been in delicate or feeble health, or that by reason thereof she had been or was during; that entire period or any portion thereof unable to perform any manual labor in her ordinary duties of life without suffering pain, or tint she had been or was iu constant or any danger of permanent disease, or that she had been in continued or any need of the services or advice of a physician, or of medicines or of food proper to such conditions.:'.. Defeudant denies that the plaintiff at divers or any time or times In the three (3) years last before the iihngof the complaint herein asked or demanded of defeudant to procure for hor the attendance r treatment of a corr.pftent or any physician or that to shoul.r furnish, 'the corap!tnnt with' nieak'ltves ijr fiod hecenry for her and. appropriate to her feeble condition, ur, . common-necessarie- ; s "f r that defendant has or had always or at ant time failed jor refused to provide her ui uicuiutti nuruu- the nieans necesor food proper ance.br to- obtain them, or1 that inconsesary quence of any failure or refusal of the defendant so 10 uo. puuntin ' nas peen compelled t'6 rely solely or at all on the charity of friends. But, on the contrary, this defendant avers that he has always and at all times furnjhed her with all means necessary to procure her suitable provisions and such medicines and medical attendance as he was advised she was at. any time in need of. Defendant denies lhat in the month of May', 1873, at Salt Lake City, or at any other time or place, defendant informed plaintiff that he would never agaia in any manner or to any extent contribute to her support or that she must thenceforth rlysolely on her own exertions for her subsistence or that of her children. But. on the contrary, this defendant avers that since that time defendant has repeatedly furnished her means of subsistence, and after that time and until she voluntarily left it as aforesaid, he furnished her with a good dwelling house to reside in. Defendant says that he has no know ledge, information or belief as to plaintiff being compelled to sell at a sacrifice such furniture, if there was any such as she claims to have owned, purchased, or had given to her, or any furniture or household articles to procure means to But desupport herself and children. fendant alleges that she was not compel led so to do, and that there was no necessity for her doing so at any time between the Cth day of April, 1808, the time of the alleged marriage of plaintiff with this defendaut, and the time when plaintiff left defendant's house as aforesaid, on or about the 15th day of July, s Wllu eiincr lueuiciut-- ilf the District Courts jurisdiction of divorce 1873. Defendant denies that he has or had for a period of more than one year, or for any time before the filing of the bill of compiaint herein, wilfully or without cause, deserted plaintiff or absented himself from her society or that he had deserted her at all. Defendant denies that by reason or in oonsequence of any act or acta of defendaut, or of any treatment or neglect of plaintiff by defendant, either in the nature of the pretended cruel or inhuman treatment in the complaint set forth or for any neglect, bad, cruel or inhuman treatment of any kind whatsoever, the said plaintiff and defendant cannot live in peace and union together, er that by reason or in consequence thereof, their mutual welfare, or the welfare of either of them requires a separation. ' Defendant denies on information and belief, that the sum of twenty thousand dollars, or any sum whatever would be a reasonable or proper fee for the plaintiff's soliicitorj and counsel in asserting her pretended legal or equitable rights growing out of said alleged marriage. Defendant denies that one thousand dollars or any other sum exceeding one hundred dollars per month, would be a reasonable allowance to the plaintiff, even if defendant was under any legal obligation to provide for the maintenance, education, and proper medical attendance of said plaintiff and her children during this litigation. Defendant denies lhat he is or has been the owner of wealth amounting to several millions of dollars, or lhat he is or has been in the monthly receipt from his property of forty thousand (dollrs or more., On the coutrary, defendant alleges that according to to his best knowledge, information and belief, all his property taken together does not exceed in value the sum of six hundred thousand dollars, and that his gross income from all of his property and every source does not exceed six thousand dol' lars per mouth. 'u Defendaut further says that at the time of the said alleged marriage this defendant had and still has a very large family, that his said family now cos e sists.of persons, all of whom are dependent upon to is defendant for EiaintenHLce and support. Whereof the defendant prays judgment of the court that- - he be Lence dismissed with his costs herein. Wiimams, Yocxo k Smtxts, and liEJtrjTSAi) & Kibkpatrick, " Defendant's.Atiorneys. . ' ' "1 County of Salt Lake.68, . .,..11 , ; Brigham Young being duly sworn on his oath says: That hV has heard read the foregoing answer, and knows ua derstands the contents thereof, and that the same is true of his own knowledge, except those matters therein stated on a is information and .'belief and' as to those matters he bclieytp it to be true. Affiant further says, that1 ie is the defendant in the above entitled suit. " ' Bruihah Yocno. Subscribed ond 'sworn to before me this 25th day of August 1W4. a . , Jos. F. XofSMAx, Clerk. , , -- ad ,JTX the Supreme Court of this Territorv then Ann EliZa'81iawei8notYouT: but Dee, because the divorce A, 0 toinedfrom Dee wasinot a divorce but only so much blank paper. In hich case the grabbers for greenbacks iD eluding the "best man," Cau "hy them doou an' Dee, TltUE AS STKEL13. The ladies of Wyoming Territory should all vote for the Democratic candidate for Delegate in Congress. He has proved himself to betrup as Steele. Our Neighbors. Evanslon, Aug. 20, 1874. Editor Jcsction: Election daj in Wyoming is near at hand 'and the people of Uinta County for the first time are thoroughly aroused to the importance of having good county officers. The nominators for county officers on both tickets are fair average men cf our community, and there has been no particular fight except forfbe office of Sherifi, and the contention kas been between C. E. Castle, present Sheriff on the Democratic side, and John Burns Esq., on the Republican. Mr. Burns in a good equare man and a gentleman of the first order; but kt some stronjj pereoual enemies beeu fighting him to the bitter end. Mr. B. bring cognixant of the facts in tb case, and unwilling to sacrifice the interests of the people of the county to two ye ire mure cf Castle reign, hu voluntarily withdrawn in favor of Mr. Ilinton Esq , of A my, than whom 1 more thorough gentleman could not be placed before the people, and in whom ve have the utmost confidence, and cno. support with a hearty good will. Mr Burns in doing this has made an unexpected sacrifice that the good people of Uinta will ever kindly remember, shois wing that the good of the people to self interest with at least one man in the county, and his many friends, to see him leave the field under the circumstances, tender him their heartfelt thanks for the generous course he has taktn. Hoping to teethe election pass off quietly and thebett men win, I will leave you for. who-hav- I part-mou- though-regrettin- Moss Asos. Practicing Jmt What He Preached. : t pm This story is told of Rev. Mr. onca settled at Worthiogton,. Mass.: f'He collected his own salHer-rie- k, for which every voter in the town was assessed, and calling oa Mr. P, the blacksmith, one day, he said: 'I have a small bill agaiust you.', 'And for what?' ary, 'For preaching.' 'For preaching?' said Mr. have heard none of your preaching. Thft' fault is vnur own.' said Mr. ilerriek. 'The doors .have been open, and you might have come in .Not long after, aa Mr. Ilerriek was one day passing the blacksmith shop, " nixty-thrc- ! hJ case rteCOUrtd'noneias i Territory of Utah, in i ''Ihave'a small bill against you. for what,?' eaid Mr. II. 1 'And 'For shoeing' your horse,' Mr. D. (' replied , , . no horsfi'shod . here,' said Mr. II. 3 ITU The fault m your Own, saw D. 'The doors have been open, and you might, have come in. Mr. Jl. paid theHll and passed on. a , A Korth ''Carolina btHc, according' to a local Journal, recently started for IB a horsehackVide near Morgantown, ' that State. She was tiding f tlinkatv drtwn & lonj slope. when the ntlomah'fl horse sttrmDiea ajij. mJ ' V11 UAm VU ' hoTSO "Ciearvu .i rider at one leap, nniann ueable'. both1 hi and koonmA rrtittb 10 hundred yards further oa a narro lane was blocked by a across it. . II ll0 Luckland, A a., recently, the "whole and cart square full speed. lo was careering at ashington; forty'miles discity of to stop equaHJ tant, with the Potomac flowingby if round was impossible, at one it" became yisable in the clouds. The o; but the agile, arjimal XllUi 4 AHlfV enchanting sccuo lasted but'a4 "few iul touua;.iW "T ; ..Tlw. charming. cart. uii moments. never lor "mgw A Memphis oanar definoa nflV-- ;. - KJ1! r Artnir' andJayshipto be wpor'1 1 . j . tising trade. abli.tcr'hlcS'dKiKgj j . t . i. . . ' - ( |