Show ANOTHER ANOMER VICTIM JAMES JAMBS TAYLOR CONVICTED OP OF f yul FUL CORA cohabitation IN THE FIRST DISTRICT COURT OGDEN CITY jan ff editor deseret new after the reading of to toe day the fol following lowig named jurors were accepted to try the case cane of the united states vs james taylor indicted for UNLAWFUL walter holbrook george corey C CJ J goodwin Goodw ln W H wattle CUS abb webb PJ john keck thomas grant W W NO corey D H U spender spencer A kuhn E M WAR williams Iams the prosecuting in attorney then seated 4 the case casa to 0 toe the jury jurt which was that the decea defendant 47 had ha three taree wives namely annie taylor annie dyer dye tallor taylor annie bailey taylor lor counsel bunse sal said the charge covered 4 period of from jane to may list lot JM 1985 in inclusive q he expected to show that there had bad been no interruption between these women and the she defendant in their ia relations of husband and wives during the three years above named thomas D dee was wa the first wit witness Os called he lived in ogden during taa th past ast four years knew the de defendant fendal kt lived lived about ardds 30 rods from him wade was defendants fend ants brother iti in law annie taylor was his sister the other two ladies were generally arje reputed to be defendants fend ants wives but witness had got not heard defendant a speak peak of them as his wives but had heard him reak speak of anniie taylor is as his wife lie during the time named neither did he remember stating before the commissioner that be had met the defendant in annie dyers house had no recollection leati on of hearing the defendant speak peak of 0 M 1 ALL OF THEM AS HIS WIVES I 1 witness had during dunne the time named seen the defendant and annie dyer and annier annie bailey at his witnesses house together but they did not go or return together he had seen the defendant and these three ladies in company with many others go to and return from church annie dyer went to salt lake a few days previous to the passage cf the edmunds law and on her return she went to live in her own house where she still resided during a portion of the time mentioned defendant had the maintenance of annie D dyer er I 1 counsel apas cpas consulted d otes notes supposed to be statements statement stake taken before the grand lury jury and asked witness a question alli suggested by those notes counsel for the defense objected and the court ruled that the attorneys on either side could consult notes no matter where they came from or originated simply for the purpose of aiding OR refreshing THEIR MEMORY on cross examination witness stated that the residence of defendant was two miles north of the city proper on main street and the general repute of the neighborhood was that during the time charged in the I 1 indictment the relations of husbands and wives between defendant and annie dyer and annie baile bailey taylor were severed F A miller was the next witness he knew the defendant and those who were alleged to be his wives previous to the time named in the indictment t he be understood that these three jiuei ladies were the wives of defendant buhour the time so named the general repute was that the relations of husband and wives had ceased to exist between bet him and annie bailey taylor I 1 court then took recess till pm at that hour M C 3 thompson a scandinavian di din avian was admitted to citizenship after stating that he liked the constitution government and country ot of the united states and promising to obey an all the laws ol of the country in the case ot nathan kimball ogden herald publishing company compan at by stipulation of counsel the suit against all ail the defendants except the corporation and hemenway was dismissed and lodgment was ente entered for and costs the case of james taylor was then them resumed and joseph B bailey a iley was called ed as a witness his tea testimony tim ony was im material matilda tilds ba bailey ile y a aged 18 ye years ars was me next t palled called A annie n e iley was her mother a and nd th the e pr previous ev to a wit ness mesa was her br brother t er she knew de had him eat at her mothers ahouee hotie zw nor sleep there during i the jhb last year aau aid not cot re mefter to have seen him go out with tp church or any other place during the time named I 1 frank lunquist was wa called to the stand he said prior to 1882 the ladies in question were generally reputed to be the wives of james taylor tout but he now knew so little of the family jela eions of the defendant that he aside august lundquist Lundqu was the next witness and his teR testimony was similar to that of the previous witness he appeared to know so little that the court severely reprimanded him as an unwilling witness and ordered him to remain and not to leave the courtroom court room un until til the court had again talked with him on this matter george thompson had known james taylor lor for 14 ye arsand was acquainted with annie taylor during the years from june 1882 1862 to may 1885 knew annie dyer byer during the same period and he understood her to be his wife as well as annie taylor he did aid not know annie bailey taylor he said it was generally understood in the neighborhood where they lived that these ladies were the wives of james jamea taylor during the years 1882 and 1885 on cross examination he admitted that during 1882 he be lived about halt the time to in davis county it was also discovered that all his bis information was based on hearsay and he actually knew LITTLE ct NOTHING about the matter william sharp was the next nest witness but was not on visiting terms with him knew the alleged wives had during the time named mamed in the indictment seen defend ant out walking and also riding in a vehicle with annie taylor and annie dyer had been acquainted with defendant for 5 or 6 years lived shout about one fourth of a rom jas taylor but ol 01 his own knowledge he knew nothing of the defendants marital relations in the year 1882 it was re ported that the relations of husband and wives had ceased to exist between defendant and annie dyer and annie bailey I 1 benjamin next put under oath to testily testify knew debei defendant bidaut and E the alleged wives and lived near mr taylor since 1872 but during the year 1882 was part art of bf the time away from howo home Q and during the time named had t ficen defendant in iii the yard of annie dyer Y and had also seen him go back and fourth h to annie baileys home but 11 t this was as seldom and aad chehad he had nevor never seen him in hi elther either home of the te ladies except on two occasions IT it was the repute that since these ladies ceased to live with james taylor as his wives ANNIA was the next witness she was prior to the passage of the edmunds edmunds law jaw the wife of the defendant during the year 1882 he called d at her house several times and ate at her table a few times she had not during that time net imet defendant at the house bouse of annie 1 lB bailey alley had walked with this lady and defendant to church defendant had bad also slept in her house a few times and also taken breakfast there meveral times during 1883 1882 but not during daring inythe the last year she had bad also several times been invited to ride into town in the same sailie carriage with me mc taylor and thomas D dee defendant contributed partially towards the support of witness eliza M garr was next sworn she was acquainted with defendant and ua hi au alleged eged wives she had bad seen the defendant and the ladies walking together a few times and also riding a few times the alleged wives were called by their maiden names to distinguish them witness has been at the home borne of annie dyer a few times but never saw defendant there this closed the testimony for the prosecution wm win barker was the first witness called for the defense he lived in mound fort had lived there fifteen years and had known defendant all that time and atille aanie bailey they almoas well as defendant lived at monad fort since March 1882 annie dyer had lived in the brick house where she now resi resided tied annie bailey had occupied her present residence since prior to 1882 in that neighborhood they had not been considered the wives of defendant since 1882 1 and id they had been known as aa A annie A le dyer and annie bailey they were not still known as his wives by the community where they lived charles morton julius parley farley and john maddock testified but heir statements were simply of the other her witnesses both sides now rested and at half past four pm the court cha charged reed the jury the instructions wre were brief and similar to the charges given in former cases of this character his honor quoted the decision of the supreme court on the definition of cohabitation he closed by saying 1 I charge you further that no public act of divorce or proclamation that he harput away the women bilte will be sufficient to hold bold him guilt guiltless es if you yon find beyond a reasonable doubt doub 11 that he lived or cohabited as I 1 have benned denned tied the term during the time mentioned in the indictment with the women arany of the them in named in the indictment all such matters would be immaterial the tae question before you Is did they live or cohabit as the term has been defined to you during the time na medin the indictment alter after a brief absence the jury ie returned into court and tine ahe foreman lore naan stated that they had not reached a verdict owing to a misunderstanding mi in relation to the evidence of annie dyer which was wa read by the official reporter when they retired and short ly after six rendered a verdict of guilty WEBER |