Show r TIIE tile CLAWSON CASK CASE 1 proceedings YESTERDAY AFTERNOON judae aln els 61 ORAL ral tal RULING anore dore WITNESSES EXAMINED our report of proceedings in the trial of rudger clawson CI awson jor for or p polygamy closed last evening while U S attorney W il rim aim nickson dickson dick s on was replying to judge Ilar liar harkness kness in defense ot the ad disability miss mis ability of certain lestIl huny tegid ing to providen pro prove vidan an alleged polygamous marriage marriages in an effort put forth to establish the first marriage the discussion cus sion it will be remembered sprung from a guestion question put by mr dickson to miss aliss alice dinwoodey a witness asking in it she was intro Introduce introduced acedo ucedo A to lydia spencer at the defendant defendants house un in the occasion of first meeting her kir sir mr dickson spoke for fok nearly tf thirty lirty minutes and having closed judge zane made tiiu thu following oral rulina the counsel for the prose prosecution tion in ia 1 this case care propose to prove as I 1 understand from the argument admissions of the defendant ot a second marriage marri arre atre the first one not being in dispute Za he be offers aio also alo prove circumstances tending to prove probe the second marriage both of these classes of evidence ibe I 1 believe you propose to offer mr dickson yes sir judge zane counsel have referred toa to a number of cases and there appears to be bea a conflict ill in these cases but the supreme court of the united united states in the case of the people against milea allies in the of otto I 1 have held that this class of evid evidence eneo enco was proper enthat case the ghe first marr matr marriage lagi was in issue anti antl the second one I 1 believe A as al admitted and audit it i would seeni seem from the authorities that 1 the issue generally has been upon the first marriage and that would be DC naturally so I 1 presume because the tho second lu marriage arriage being more recent might be more easily proven it Is 19 not until the be prosecution have some evidence at least satisfactory evidence of the second marriage that an indictment is found and the investigation usually is directed more in bigamy cases with respect peet tollie second than the first marriage its it as insisted that a different rule ho weyer applies that while the admissions ot the defendant f e and circumstantial evidence are competent to prove a first marriage it Is not competent to prove prote a second reasons have been given one eneis as I 1 believe that the first marriage being more remote it may be more dilli difficult cult to prove drove it by the records record while that is so 0 t there er are some soine reasons why the second marriage r a e where the first is admitted would id be difficult to prove I 1 because in a country where there ils iss a law as in this a against a 1 ta a second mar marriage niage it is as not te s 0 n to pres presume urne that that a p person r perron knowing that he was subject to punishment would f furnish the evidence ey by which he could be le convicted and it would seem seeni to me ine that the admission of the second marriage if clearly and deliberately made and correctly un correctly reported would be of greater weight as as to tile the second marriage then an admission of the first marriage bafo before re the second marriage took place because it Is i not to be pi presumed e that ta person knowing that a transaction which he acknowledges would state that it occurred when IV it had not occurred men nien sometimes will tell a lie when they think the lie will do them better than the truth truths but no man is so fond rf it that he ha will tell a lie when the truth wiltho will do mm better mendo not state falsehood falsehoods for the purpose of receiving punishment and it would seem to r ne me therefore if tiie tile defendant deliberately makes the statement that he had married a second wife while the first one was living that at least ought to be competent evidence to so go to the jury in respect to the circumstanced it would seem that in this territory there is no law requiring a record to be kept of marriages antenone and none requiring witnesses to be presen tand it cannot be proved by the record because there is no legal record there is no record made anade in pursuance of the law resort therefore must be made to other evidence to the testimony of persons who were present predent to the admission of the defendant and the circumstances cum stances while the general rule is that is competent to prove a fact t by by the testimony mony moDy of a witness who knows itis it is competent to jo prove it by circumstances that is the general rule unless there IS 19 some bome law against it it is a presumption lon we know khow fact no human affair stands alone it is connected with others the cause and the 0 of f the act every act in a mans life Is connected with others and the ceremony of marriage marriage marni marri avre aire Is necessarily not like any other transaction in human manlike life ilfe it is not just like ilke and the circumstances that stand around and and follow sud aud precede are not like any other transactions in human life and when these circumstances when a coincidence of circumstances all po pointing i to a marriage marriages concur it would V id seem tome that they ought to be competent evidence for tor you cannot explain them upon any 0 her reasonable hypothesis than the existence of the tile marriage they ought to forma form a reasonable inference of the marriage 11 and while the authorities are conflict ing lag yet I 1 am disposed to hold th that at upon the weight of author authority ity this testimony ought to be permitted to go to th the ejury lury the judge shaving ceased miss alice allce dinwoodey was recalled and the examination am went on the question before objected to was put plit again and the witness replied 1 I was introduced to lydia spencer at that time by my sister florencei florence I 1 think do not nos know whether lydia avas there as a visitor or not guess she had a room there it was upstairs I 1 think florences bedroom was down stairs I 1 saw lydia there once at meal time slie she took her meal with the family faintly never heard florence nor anyone else in the presence of defendant hayany say anything about defendants relations with lydia spencer if I 1 ever said sald anything about it to anyone it was jokingly believe I 1 have spoken to florence about a report that loud rud 11 had another wife bilt blut dont remember that she answered anything think it was april they had a child which ivas treated treated like one of the family but I 1 never heard defendant say it was his their house houge in the ward was almost op opposite p osite president youngs graye grave north B being et ing sworn said am acquainted with the defendant he married my daughter florence aim alm two kwo years ears ago last august they elivea lived avite with me perhaps a year afterwards had a child and anid then went ti to live in the ath ward they went there before january 1 ma I 1 occasionally visited them and have dined or lunched there probably twice have met lydia spen pen her ber there called edited there with my wife and lydia answered the door I 1 af afterwards ter asked who she was and was told it was lydia afterwards heard her name was lydia spencer when sh shar came to the door she WAS not dressed for the street this was before last april and less than six months ago I 1 belleve believe mever never conversed with defendant antas as tollis to his relationship with lydia spencer nor rop spoke of it to anyone else in his presence 11 mr dickson nad had you heard it xe ie ported prior to april last that defendant had married lydia spencer question objected to by the defense prosecution stated that they did not offer it in evidence but simply to refresh f witnesses mei mel memory hory the court sustained the objection mr nir dickson did you vdu ever speak to the defendant a about out his contemplated marriage with lydia spencer objected to court permitted witness to answer witness no mr nir dickson did you ever hear bear him say anything about taking another wife witness ss no 11 7 jlmes jimes I 1 E calne CAINE was sworn and testified I 1 live in the i ct c eily cily I 1 t y am 94 22 years yeara old and a son of jdant caine have known defendant for about fifteen years jears know florence clawson but did not before her marriage i do not know lydia spencer ex capt by sight L know ol of her saw her first in spencer Claw sons store about a year ago last march the employed emp loyes were orson rogers it 11 V decker rudger clawson W lund and antl myself iny eif elf the defendant was bookkeeper think thin k he commenced there in december 1882 1 started to work there in march 1882 and quit in july 1883 my employment was that of drummer principally I 1 went back a week ago last friday and quit again jast last night while employed there first I 1 was out traveling about half the time have seen lydia come into the store mort twenty or thirty times from march 1882 to july 1883 she came to see rudger clawson his place was inside the railing in the southeast south east corner of the store she went inside the railing at times tile the defendant was the only one regularly employed in that part nave seen her talking with him have not seen them leave t the he store or ol come in to together ether have seen florence come in t two wo or three times a week she came to see the defendant def enda nt I 1 have nave conversed with the tile defendant defend ant on the subject of his relationship with w ith lydia I 1 think it was in april 1883 that was the only time lydia had hab beeg been thereto there to see him immediately before it was only a few seconds after alid while she was leaving leavin the store mr nir dickson what W hat was said by y you and the defendant question excepted to by the defense the witness was allowed to go on he said sald 1 4 I 1 asked him if that was his second wife he said yes yes I 1 never after that colv conversed e with him on the same matter cross examined by judge Be bennett jinett linett was anyone else present resent when this conversation took place place 11 witness alno no 11 where was it and when in the office I 1 think in april 1883 1 redirect 1 could you tell more accurately cura tely by referring to the stores books witness 1 I think I 1 could as I 1 could then tell when I 1 was out ana and when in the witness was esc excused used for sor forthe the time heing being but before he had left the roo room in U y S attorney dickson beckoned him back and the two stood converging conver fing ping in whispers a few moments after which the attorney announced that he desired nir mr caine recalled the witness again took the stand mr dickson amr mr caine did you ou ever have any conversation with the defendant after that in relation to the first conversation I 1 I 1 witness 1 I did mr dickson when aben was it witness bitnes last bast night nl ht or night before last I 1 mr dickson what was lt it objections witness 1 I had been subpoenaed aed with the other clerks the defendant delen deien dant came to me moe and said sald 1 I understand you vou have ave said sald that you asked me if lydia dia dla was as rny iny mv second wife I 1 answered yes esl I 1 replied yes I 1 said so lie he t then basald said sald he did not say yes orif or if he did it was qualified as yes what they say or something to that effect I 1 replied that I 1 did not hear him say anything huttes hu bu tYes 1 Ile he sald said well you admit there is a doubt I 1 answered yes there is a doubt but not ilmy in my mind I 1 meant the doubt was in his mind we will here state that mr caine while evincing great readiness to answer did not deliver the above glib 31 narrative arra tive continuously such a proceeding was attempted at the st start arthut but was objected to by the defense and so mr dickson plied him with leading questions which we haye have omitted for brevi tys sake simply bunching the answers made jonn JOHN M X YOUNG was the next witness who testified liv live e in the tenth ward th this Is city am 28 years old oid have known the defendant probably two thirds of that time I 1 have known lydia spencer about 18 months I 1 first saw her at her home on 0 n third east street in the tenth ward dont know the other parties names rames who reside in the house I 1 saw thede the de fondant there a short time after I 1 first met the lady never saw him in id the house but have seen him hlin frequently coming coining and going lie he came at midday and in the evening at or 7 and I 1 saw him leave at 8 in the morning have llave seen both in company together frequently at the theatre and elsewhere we went vent to the theatre to gether randay and my wife and I 1 came home with t them emt saw him enter the gate I 1 never carried a message to her I 1 frequently see tile tiie people who lived in the same house but dont know where they now live the house ia owned by miss spencers mother af mrs rs auer walter walten J U BATIK an employee of X Z C al I 1 was examined tor for the purpose of fixing the time november 1879 49 when the defendant last entered that institutions employ and december 1882 2 when he left lef t SPENCER CLAWSON was then sworn and testified I 1 reside in this city my business is wholesale dry goods at no 51 and 52 main street defendant has been ill in my employ as bookkeeper boek keeper since january 1883 have known lydia spencer six mo months trisor or a year abear she has been to my store frequently she gile came to obtain work and usually talked with whichever of the clerks she met first I 1 have seen her in the domce with my brother a number of times I 1 visited his house once I 1 cant recall the date noone no one was there except my wife myself my brother and his wife iid ild lid did not see lydia spenceil Spen pencer cei cel there the renever never conversed with defendant about her have seen them 0 together o e tl once or twice going to cerchi church mrs florence clawson was not with them think this was before christmas christinas I 1 am unable to locate the date I 1 have never been introduced to lydia spencer lam not a member of the yard ward improvement association lydia spencer never bought goods at my store s t ore and had them charged to defendant never had a conversation with him about it mr air dickson do you remember the incident of 0 a parcel having been picked up in your our stoic of yourself orsome or someone onee else eise e saying whose is this of some one ones S answering buds cifes and of ilis nis saying which one witness 1 dont recall it definitely I 1 remember something of such a package age ame and of someone saying etwas it was lydia spencers I 1 ordered it rolled up aniu antu laid away i for or her I 1 dont know that defendant was there I 1 dont remember the remark about iuds wife cant recollect that it took place I 1 made no such remark I 1 can only state that I 1 have no recollection of it the court reporter read from mr claw sons previous testimony ony where he stated that he did not recall it definitely by definitely I 1 meant I 1 only recalled the portion I 1 stated stared mr dickson do you jou ou state that abat you did not state on that occasion a good p piece bece of evi evl evidence evidenced dencel mr air clawson I 1 have no recollect recollection iou lou of making such remark my books would no not i show any charge for goods gotten otten by lydia spencer it would ony be a memorandum as she had no ac count could not say whether or not my books show that she purchased goods on his account he has never deen teen been absent from iroemy my employ any I 1 length of time only IL few hours occasionally 0 jo o go to the lake etc I 1 was ras away iii in january and february 1883 alst aist from june to the left again in august and was absent in janu january ary and february 1881 orson |