Show QUEER TANGLE IN GRAHAM INGRAHAM CASE Supreme Court Sets Aside Provo Mans Conviction t PLURAL PLURA WIFE VE AT kT PROVO 4 STE BE PROSECUTED lE lEThe 4 The supreme court yesterday ruled that tat a prosecution for unlawful co cohabitation cohabitation habitation must m st be brought in the thc county count In which tho the plural wife wIe re resides resides sides and that In cases casos caas In which the legal wife we resides in one county and the tho plural wife in another county the offender cannot be prosecuted in the ia in which the legal wife resides At the te saran same se time the court hell helt that John ohn C Graham Grham of Provo cannot be prosecuted In lii Salt Sal Lake county al at although although though the wife with wit whom he in iu charged l with wih cohabiting in this county is 16 I alleged to be his 1118 plural wife wie but must be prosecuted proseCuted In Utah county where it I is alleged the legal wife re resides reside sides aides side This Thi decision may seem serin anomalous anomalous alous but it I IB le not The court was guided by the record before it U Grahams conviction was set aside lor the reason that the tho record showed that the to Utah Uth county wife wie was the plural plura wife and the Salt Sal Lake Le county wife wie was wa the legal le l wife wIe The lle prosecution showed at the tho trial of the case that the Provo wife was married marIed to Graham Graam as a a plural his first frt and legal wife then being alive ale Subsequently the first wife wile died and the plural wife wiCe became the legal wife but t e s death deat of or the te first fr wife was wa not shown by the evidence and so far tar as shown toy ty the record of oC the case cae the Provo wile wife q was wan wa still a plural With reference to the Salt Sal Lake wife nothing was wa shown by the te evidence as ast tc t er statue whether she was a a legal r 1 a plural wife and the court ruled that the presumption of the law was that she was the lawful wife wie since the theIn law In w presumes Innocence Innocence in the absence of or evidence of ot guilt guIt Thus guided by the record the court held that the legal wife was the plural wife and the plural wife was wa the te legal wife and ad that the tho prosecution should have have been brought in Utah county History of Case The defendant Graham Graam was wa post postmaster postmaster postmaster master at Provo at the time the case cae was called aled for trial tia first frt but on ac no account account count of the inability to secure the service of or a subpoena upon the alleged plural wife wi ft Sarah Saah Potter Graham a continuance was wa ordered till tm early eary last tall lall 01 At the trial tria then before belore Judge Norrell Norrel County Attorney Putnam pros prosecuting prosecuting and Charles Mostyn Owen ap appearing as a complainant Graham Grah was wa convicted on the charge of unlawfully cohabiting with wih Mary Mar A Graham Grham and Sarah Potter Graham in Salt Sal Lake continuously from Jan 1 1898 and ad May 12 1809 After conviction Graham was sen see sentenced sentenced to pay a fine of and an appeal was taken taen to the supreme court the the appellant relying upon an assign nt of errors in instructions to the jury jur r for a a reversal reveral of or the verdict The I was writ written written opinion delivered yesterday ri ten by District Judge and con concurred conc c in by Justices Baskin and Bartch the latter later dissenting only from the process of or reasoning but agreeing te in the result resul The opinion orders the Quashing of the Information upon which Graham Grham was tried end convicted One of r he the ch Instructions to the tle jury assigned d by appellant as a reverl ble fole error was wa wa the rhe instruction to find fiad fd defendant guilty if it I were found that he be gUy with Sarah Saral Potter Gra Graham Graham ham bm in Salt Lake county cun and at the te same amo time had a wife in Utah county In like Uke manner the appellant excepted to the instruction which the court re refused fused tle to give gle the te Jury jur to the effect that defendant d shoud shou be acquitted acquited If I the evidence he held laid hod not co cohabited cohabited habited bable county with wiSh wit both wives in Salt Lake Offense Not Divisible The prosecution was waged under section seton 46 of the revised revise statutes statute which provides that an offense 4 is 18 committed pertly partly in one county and partly in another it i may mao ma be tried tre in either of the counties counte but to this the he opinion oiin eiter replies Ut that tl t oni in cases cas of theft embezzlement other unlawful unlawful ful fU taking of property can cn the rule foe be e applied for the te reason reSO that they are divisible offenses whereas unlawful o le Is II not no a divisible of ot offense Referring again to t the vital al point the thu agi court urt declares opinion of the supreme delares that the jury was bound from the evi evidence evidence dence tbt te in the le case coe to hold bold the defend defendant defendant ant al innocent of pC the te crime rime of unlawful ful UI o with wih Sarah potter Poter Graham in Salt Sal Lake county because without proof prof that tot she se was nas as his polygamous polygamous olg amous wife it is presumed that she is the lawful wit wife of ot the accused aused Thi dec ti iSun tun i It Is ased e upon the established etab acts rather than lne rule that tbt legal act rIme are to tH be e presumed virtue t an and ml morality rather ather than opposite P further furler comment on this feature of o the the case Ce ne the opinion rotates relates that Graham Cham did not e at the toe home thome Jome of ol h hH hi fe alleged plural wife wilc in Sat SaH Sa t Lake Lne fla nt in the face fae fae of ot the te world wald the t ostentation and opportunities of a household Not a Pu Public lc Offense Ofee Consequently while defendants ns as mie n and relations rations v h th a awful lawful wife iCe tn In 1 SaK St SI Luke Lake county was ws a a matter be and aind roved by bythe bythe bythe nee F to pleaded proved the state tate continues the te opinion yet association act or conduct condu t was suo not a a public offense nor a part of any ore ad and not Dot being or constituting demerit of any an offense it could not toe be e an act or the effects ef of ot an ant act t nece neer ary to the consummation of ofa ofa a J beu e no crime r me is corn com comp Cm p e d in Whole ole or in r art rt of lawful act at Re atTe The Te opinion of elf o the court urt further ob observes observes serves that tat It is not ess to prove sexual Intercourse to establish the of or unla cohabitation it i be being beIng ing leg only o y necessary to hold out a B sem tance nance ance at O marriage to t the te world yet infer inter such tuch guilt acts acta are are not to be construed to o case oae oe Rob Roberts Ro erts ert rt on n a similar charge cherge carge of o unlawful w e to t have been argued ag at this term of ot the he supreme court curt but wince since many of the te points involved are pr identical in the te Graham case cae it i was t agreed that tat the case c go over until Bitter suiter te She te ruling of the te court cut in inthe Inthe inthe the ca C cee e now decided The opinion in inthe Inbe inthe the be Graham case eata i J not construed as a favorable erts case came to the Che defendant d in the Rob itch Roberts Rb |