Show STILL ANOTHER TRIO Yesterdays Work in the Third District Court MESS BALL JONES liD SMITH Convicted of Unlawful Cohabitation YesterdayGrand Jury Room Testimony Tes-timony Sentences on the 37th The entire attention of the Third District Court yesterday was occupied with the three cases set for that day the first one taken up during dur-ing the morning session being that of J P Ball No even numbers wore called and the jury as accepted by the prosecution and defense stood as follows fol-lows George Turnbull F H Bemis James Owen J J Greenwald H N Greene N A Scribner Gideon Turnbull W H Rinington Elmer Hill George Tait Fred Grose W M Ferry The indictment was read charging that the defendant between tho 1st day of January 1882 and up to and including includ-ing November 30 1835 unlawfully cohabited wrl nYa 1f iredv d habited with Emma Anderson Ball and Phoebe Birkenhead Ball as his wives The defendant had heretofore plead not guilty and the case proceeded by the calling of ISABEL CALL who testified that she was 13 years of age on being asked her fathers name however she was so overcome that she could not answer and commenced to cry piteously in which she was joined by another sister who had also been summoned as witness wit-ness against her father At this point Mr Ball requested that the wi ness be excused from testifying and took the stand himself His testimony testi-mony was to the effect that during the period named in the indictment lived nth tho two women mentioned as his wives Aa is usual under such circumstances the jury returned a verdict of guilty without leaving the box Saturday the 27th inst was named as the day for the sentence The case against Thomas Jones who is under three indictments was the next one called and a jury was summoned i sum-moned on the indictment charging that between December 1st 1832 and December Decem-ber 31st 1883 the defendant unlawfully cohabit with Eliza Jesse Jones and Mary Orgill Jones as his wives The foll wing gentlemen wero called to the box and accepted to try the case George Tnrnbull F H Bemis Frederick Grose James Owens J J Greenwald N A Scribner James Berry J C Couklm Jerome Bourgard W E Smedley Bolivar Roberta W M Ferry The defendant at his own request took the stand and testified thtt between be-tween the dates named in the indictment indict-ment he had lived with the ladies named in the indictment as his wivei A prompt verdict of guilty was rendered ren-dered from the jury box and sentence fixed for February 27th The other two indictments were continued for the term Tho case against John Y Smith was the next one called The even numbers were prgmptly fired leaving N H Greene James Berry Gideon Turnbull Elmer Hill George Tait J C Conklin in the box MB DICKBOH stated that a material witness was absent and he would like time to confer with others in regard to the case Subpmnas were issued for S H Lewis and Morris R Evans and af ter a recess of fifteen minutes court adjourned until 2 oclock On the reassembling of court at 2 oclock Gideon Turnbull was peremp torily challenged by the defense and H N Green by the prosecution This left rat four jurors in the box and the fol lowing were called and accepted thus completing the desired number George Turnbull Fred Grose J J Greenwald Bolivar Roberts Jerome Boureard V M Ferry F H Bemis James Owens In answer to Mr Dicksons questions Mr Greenwald said he had known the defendant for some years had no in timate business with him and did not want anyhe was an officer Mr Roberta Rob-erta said his acquaintance would not in fluence his verdict but he had an opinion opin-ion as to the guilt or innocence of the defendant it was not unqualified how ever I he jury was then sworn and the indictment read charging the defendant with having during the time between th 1st of January 18S3 to and in iudmg the 31st of December 1883 co habited with Francis Smith Mary smith and Annie Hilton sometimes known as Annie Smith as his wives The case was opened by the calling of JOHS Y SMITH JK Defendant is my father my mothers name is Francis she lives in the Third Ward she lived there in 1SS3 father lived there also during that time have seven brothers and sisters three or four of them were at home during that year I taw Jane this morning Francis is still living there Jane is about 13 AUllrcwabout 15Janeis the voungest him never heard him speak of her as 1m wife never remember father intro ducing her as Mrs Smith dont think I have ever heard father say he was married Lave never heard father speak of his marriage to mother wond naturally suppose they were married knew Annie Hilton she lived just onprsite to us in a house on the same lotthere was no fence between he houses were about threo rods apart father frequently took meals at our I houe and presided at the table he frequently engaged in family prayers have never heard him mention mother particularly Annie Hilton has five children I believe their names are Annie Lochland Nettie George and May have not seen Annie Hilton for two or three weeks MB DICKBOS When you last saw her did she appear as though sue was about to be confined Objected to objection overruled WUiess continued I do not think she was I have seen Annies children in mothers house sometimes was at home during 1883 father spent most of his time at my mothers house and generally took his meals there have seen father go to Annies house and I also come from it have never met him there have seen father going to and from the house frequently during the last three or four years Objected to objection overruled exceptions taken Have seen him in Annie Hiltons company com-pany it is not a tact to my knowledge that during tri past three or four years tcu has lived at Annie Hiltons house have never spoken to father about Annies children and never asked him for any explanation about those children WILLIAM HILTON Have known defendant de-fendant for thirteen or fonrteen years he has lived in the Third Ward during the past two or three years know Frances SmIththe lady the preceding witness calls his mother have a sister sis-ter named Annie she is about 39 years of age during the year 1833 I do not know where she lived she was at my uoue about a year ago she staid there about live or six weeks saw her when she went before the rand jury she may live in tho Third Ward now so far us I know have not visited defendants house for years have other sisters living in this country one named Margaret Ballantyne she lives on First South Street between ME SUEEKS We object the questions ques-tions are immaterial and irrelevant MB DICKSON Ill make it material before I get through But I pass it for the present To witnessDo know or care whether her children arc bastards or notMI MI SHEEKS We object to any such testimony Ms DICKSOK insisted that witness answer the question and Mr She ks also insisted that the question bo not allowed The question was allowed by the Court and exception taken Witness continued have never hall any quarrel with my sister have always al-ways been on good terms with her All of my sisters are living in this city I believe be-lieve dont know what name Anmes children go by Annies oldest child is about 11 years of age have never talked with my sister about her children never asked her whether she was married mar-ried or not never met defendant at my sisters house never heard defendant call that house his mother is living I do not know where she is staying with somo of her children Annie left mothers home about 10 or 12 years ago have met defendant at mothers house before Annie left there Mn DICKSON Did defendant come to your mothers house to pay his addresses ad-dresses to your sister Annie Objected to objection overruled exception taken by defense Continuing witness saidI never noticed any particular affection on his part toward my sister defendantcame to mothers house frequently after my si ter lett never saw Annie in com wny with the defendant except two or three times Me DICKSOK Do you have any be lief as to who tho father of your sisters children Objected to as not being material testimony argued objection overruled exception by defense WITNESS have no opinion or impression ression as to who the father of those children isI i have never bothered myself my-self about it do not know who has been living with my sister Annie I have never been there often enough to find outJAMES JAMES HILTON was called Know defendant fendant have known him since 1874 have a sister named Annie she lives in he Third Ward have not been there for about five years saw her about six or seven months ago as 1 was driving past her house got acquainted with the defendant at my mothers house saw him there two or throe times my sister left mothers home about ten or eleven years ago I relieve she went to live m the Third Ward I believe when she left mothers S H LEWIS Was called for but failing to respond a deputy was dispatched dis-patched for him and durmg the wait MARTHA JAKLSON was called and swornAm married know defendant have known him all my life am on friendly terms with him know Frances Smith have visited there during 1883 know Annie Hilton have never visited her have been at her house never met her at his house have not seen Annie for a month or more was not very close to her > when I did see her but near enough to observe her closely do not know whether she has a little baby have teen her children in defendants house I think May is abontS years old S H LEWIS having come in was sworn Know defendant was before the grand jury when the investigation was had leading to this indictment defendant defend-ant came in to testify offering himself as a witness MK DICKSON Did he make a statement state-ment there about Mn SUEEKS We object that is exposing ex-posing the secrets of the grand jury room He made an argument against the admission ad-mission of such testimony claiming that everything that occurred in the grand jury room should be kept secret the statute required that it should be so if a grand juror cannot give evidence it is certain that the prosecuting at torney cannot ME DICKSOX argued in opposition to it claiming that if the party who went before the grand jury did net object to giving testimony as to what occnrrec in the grand jury room it was not the privilege of the de fendant to object There could be no grounds for such objection The de fendant went before the grand jury voluntarily and gave certain informa tionand public interests would not b served in this case by suppressing that information A grand juror might object to testify in order to shield him self but it the grand juror had no ob eclioj the defendant had no right to cbject Besides witness was not a grand jnror ho was an officer of the court and the statute did not reach inmME ME YOUNO Defendant has a right to raise the question My friend Mr DIckson says the defendant would not be injured by such testimony If not I I would like to ask who would be l It is imperative upon everybody to tey the statute It is a crime for any grand jtyor to testify as to what occnred in the grand jury room and if the statute applies to the juror it must apply to both the clurk and the Proiiecutiiig Attorney and not only to them but to all l who through any manner may gain access to the grand jury room The Judge called for the statute and fitter examining it for a moment said that wiif n a deiendaut had voluntarily gone before a grand jury and made a statement at lust liiiuelf it was propt r that said testimony should be used 1 he witness may answer Excepted to by the defense Witness He made a statement saying say-ing that during 1883 he had lived with the women named in the complaint com-plaint He said that Annie Hilton was his third wife He said he had lived with these women as his wives thathe had held thins out as his wives and lived with them for three or four years prior to the fall in which the indictment was found To MR YOUNG It was in the fall of 1885 when we examined the case defendant de-fendant stated that he bad not lived with Annie after the fall previous to the one in which the indictment was found that he had held them out as his wvcs np until the fall of 18S4 I thought he had commenced rather late to obey the law JOHN Y SMITH JR was recalled saw Annie at her house a couple of weeks ago I suppose father owns the place although I ncvcrhcard him speak of It as his THOMAS SMITH I am a deputy marshal mar-shal have been since the 1st of Febrdary know Annie Hilton went with Collin to serve a subpoena on her about 9 oclock in the morning Mr Smith was there at that time a sub puma has been placed in my hands for service upon Annie Hilton in this case 1 searched the house this morning but failed to find her Mr Franks had the subpoena until this morning when he went out of town and handed the paper to me I saw Annie Hilton when she appeared in the grand jury room MK DICKSON Did you observe whether she appeared to be pregnant or notMn YOUNG We object Defendantis on trial for what occurred in 1885 The question was withdrawn and the prosecution rested MR SMITH was sworn for the defense Am defendant this case was before the grand jury sometime last November Novem-ber I saw Mr Lewis at that time and asked to make a statement I told them that 1 was living in accordance with the Edmunds law I gave the mines of two of my wives aad told them that Annie Hilton had reft my place about a year before To Mn DICKEON Did you not live with Annie Hilton as your wife during 1883 Objected to as not being proper examination ex-amination Argued Objection overruled over-ruled as usual WiTSEsa did not live with Annie Hilton during 1833 I went therewith provisions etc probably once a week dont think I was therein there-in the evening during that year Did not have intercourse with her during that year A pause by Mr Dickson Then to witness Is it a fact that you did contemplate during the last month coming into court and pleading guilty Objected to but question allowed WITNESS I contemplated pleading guilty to this indictment by request f t ilitA I dont think I lived with Annie Hilton during 1883 I would not swear to iL By agreement of counsel the case was submitted without argument and I the charge of the judge was in its usual vein The case was given to the jury at 415 They were out but twenty minutes when they returned with a verdict of guilty Jurors were discharged from the case and excused until this morning at oclock Sentence in this case will be pronounced pro-nounced on the 27th inst Court adjourned until this morning at 10 oclock |