Show CORRE correspondence THE FIRST DISTRICT COURT count OGDEN CITY june 1885 editor deseret news the court convened a again aln alu this morning in and was opened at ee the usual ho hour ur the TIL legal luminaries were again present in large force orce and the court room was crowded to its utmost capacity with people from fan far lar and near all of whom were in some way or other interested te in the tile proceedings the first case that was waa attended to this morning was the tile bond bona forfeiture of ansle ANNIE DYER dyen judge williams explained his position in relation to this witness and said he had desired to see the bond to learn whether she was held by b it beyond her appearance before the grand jury lury counsel said he had never obstruct obstructed obstructer ef the course of justice and he lie did liot not now intend to do ilo so mr vir varian varlan read the bond which showed that witness was under obligation to appear in the district court when called upon and she had up to the present time failed to do so the ba bailiff I 1 liff was then instructed to call annie dyer and order her to come into court this he did three times but there was no response and the ithe court ordered the bonds FORFEITED thos thosa stevens and thomas dee were the bondsmen ponds men and were informed of the forfeiture of the same james H 11 nelson appeared in court was arraigned and pleaded I 1 not guilty to the charge of unlawful cohabitation according to the edmunds law mr F S richards for the defense said they were not ready to go to trial to dagand asked for a time to be set in the future and they would endeavor to bereacy be ready after some conversation between counsel and the court ills his honor continued the case for the term the case of the people vs james 31 brown was called up and by consent of both parties was waa continued for the term the next case called was that of the united states vs F A brown charged with unlawful cohabitation WITH HIS WIVES the defendant pleaded not guilty the following jurors were called as petit atit juryman jurymen jury men to try the case aaron BD de e sit witt vit B bluford binford alord A bybee james II 11 st stewart e art T taomas nom bom as slater jesse vander 1 hoof stephen moyle alma mathews illa INIa pet peter yeter e r jens jensen en joseph smith george W larkins josh williams william lowe jos B moore F S richards Klc hards stated the complaint and examined the jury as to their qualifications to try this case mr air varian then examined the jury A mathews Math evvs P jensen and george whacking were challenged tor for belief in plural marriage joshua williams DID NOT BELIEVE belleve I 1 itis it is right for amanto a man to have andico and aud cohabit with more chaa than one wife at the same time but he refused to say whether or not he was a member of the mormon church charch or believed in the revelation on plural marriage after argument by counsel in which mr varian insisted on his right according to the edmunds law to ask these questions and that it was the duty of the tile juror to answer the court said that while he regretted on account of the juror that the question had been asked he decided the questions were proper the juror still thought the questions were improper and more worthy the than the century the prosecution then challenged the juror the challenge was denied by the defense the juror then said he did not believe the edmunds law or any of its provisions was in CONFLICT WITH THE I LAW IW W OV 01 GOD and he did not believe in any revelation that conflicted with the edmunds law but he still objected to say whether or not he was a bemb arof theA the Mormon lormon church the court pressed the question tion as to its being proper joshua then said 1 I AM NOT 9 but asserted that he knew that be he was fully qualified to act as a ing to the edmunds act win yin win lowe and jos B moore were challenged for belief in the rig rightful hatful ness of a man to have more than one living lilg and wife at uhe the same time the balance of the jurors were t then it e rl sworn and the following names were taken from the ballot bo box X W W funge J M langsdorf al L ensign J W abbott I 1 walker barlow 11 II it thomps n M N 1 L ensign and W barlow bailow were challenged for their belief in polygamy K R A wells and thos 11 blackburn were then called wells had formed a a W FIXED unqualified OPINION on the matter and was challenged and excused blackburn was excused lor for his belief in plural marriage T 11 II musgrave mus Mua grave and john S brooks were called the latter was absent at tintic gintic and was excused newton farr was called and responded spon ded lie was challenged for his bis belief at this juncture the court adjourned till 2 pm p m at which nour it reassembled and thomasj thomas J black was accepted asa as a juror this completed the panel of TWELVE GOOD mes MEN AND TRUE the indictment was read and defendant was sworn by his own request ile he then read a statement in which he set forth that he came of new england stock that his forefathers were brave and patriotic and fought to obtain the i independence of this country that he was trained to piety and love of his native land and its institutions at this tills point the court said it thought the matter the defendant was reading was matter which more properly should come before the court lor for consideration hereafter but at the intercession of ilon HOD F S richards he was permitted to proceed continuing the article gave a brief account of his childhood how he was taught 0 in his youth to revere the HOLY noly BIBLE and its precepts his hearing and embracing the gospel as tau taught ht by the tiie churuti of jesus christ chrish ot of latter atter day saints including plural marriage marii man lage age inis iris H IS family were as honorable as us any moll roon family and were as dear to hi him in as that of any other man ile he asked what he should do should he cast them off or should he keep the sacred covenants and obligations he had entered into with them loather rather than violate his holy covenants he would suffer his bis arm to be SEVERED FROM HIS ills BODY ile he concluded by saying he was in the hands bands of the court who could incarcerate him in it prison for 0 obeying t the e commands of god but as long as he e lived he should obey the supreme law of god in preference to any law of the land let the tile consequences to him be what they may lie he expected to yet stand belore before the bar of god and to OBTAIN JUSTICE THERE if he could not get it here the court in avery ayery a very considerate manner told the jury that they could not accept the statements of the defendant as evidence except that relating to his bis having entered into plural marriage in the year 1857 1837 long before the enactment oi of the EDMUNDS LAW LANN the defendant then acknowledged that he had lived and still continued con to live with both his wives as such and that he had children by each of them the case was then submitted without examining witnesses or adyar any auy argument u on either side at a quarter to three pc tock lock the coutt in a brief lucid concise manner CHARGED THE JURY W they retired to their room la in charge 0 an officer to consider their verdict and were absent twelve minutes when they entered reentered re the court and returned a verdict of guilty as charged lin tin in the indic indictment truent 11 at the request of mr richards in which mr air varian concurred the sentence was deferred until the lith of july borop brown was next called he lle asked p to withdraw his plea of not t ml y to the charge of assaulting in and read gead plead guilty this he said I 1 he did 0 of f his nis is own free will without hope for or expecting any favors f from rom tile the court in consequence his ills request was granted and sentence was set lor for july lith WEBER |