Show FINDINGS OF U S commissioner mckay IN T I 1 IF CASE CASK AGAINST MH nir ANGUS 31 CANNON the vs angus anens 31 cannon Toly polygamy gamy and cohabitation 1 there is not probable cause to believe the defendant guilty on the first count and as to that he is discharged 2 in respect to the count in the complaint the statutes relating to criminal or unlawful ul cohabitation are so 0 numerous and diver divergent ent that to draw oraw from them a uniform definition of the offense is difficult no legal definition 11 of what constitutes cohabitation Is given iu in the edmunds bill bili so called it is under the ad sections of that act that the second count in this complaint Is 19 1 9 drawn the indelicacy of the subject has been said to forbid le legislatures and courts to state tate what particular conduct will con constitute the offense of criminal cohabitation and that the common sense of any well regulated community as well as the sense propriety and moral morality ltv which most people entertain is sufficient to apply the statute to each particular case and point out what conduct Is rendered criminal by it the pernicious influence of an evil example is plain to every reflect reflection reflecting In mind and the powerful influence wf of this particular vice upon society not only in its effects upon the relations in private life but as being the origin of much public crime sug su suggests g ests what the law has made it a cri crl crime me against society 0 in criminal statutes the term cohabitation is used in reference to persons of opposite sex and implying the practice or the opportunity to practice unlawful sexual intercourse there Ther must emust bethe be the same habitation that where one dwells there the other dwells but that they occupy the same bed is not a necessary ingredient of the crime and proof of that fact need not be made the current of authority a as laid down by text writers and the decisions of courts of last resort hold that the offense is made out if there be shown a living or dwelling together where this is plain nahi nahl the law at once presumes other concomitants follow and in effect excludes proof of particular acts in commonwealth vs hall Mass ass 61 it was held upon an indictment for adultery that when a man speaks speak s of a woman living with him as his wife it is sufficient evidence of the fact of their cohabitation one important object of thel the law awls awis is to prevent evil and indecent examples which tend to dle die corruption of public morals and if the acts complained of and covered by the statute are done in such manner or under such circum i stances as necessarily become public or generally known in the neighborhood as bein being notoriously against public decency and good morals they come within the scope of the law it follows from this view of the law and the 6 evidence in the case that the there r e is probable cause to believe the defendant guilty second count of the it is ordered that he give ball in the sum slim of 1500 for his appearance before the february term of the district court with two good and sufficient clent suri surl ties each in the like sum to answer to this complaint or whatever else may way he then and the there re objected against him and that he st stand ind committed until said order is complied with |