Show HOW convictions ARE AKE SECURED T THE HE case of james taylor in the tb first judicial district was disposed of in a similar gimilaro manner to the second case against lorenzo snow there was however but one indictment against a g a last the former while there were three for the same offense against the latter mr taylor was reputed to have three wives the evidence showed that he had lived with one since the passage of the edmunds law each wife occupied a separate house he had visited them a few times during the past three years the understanding of the public in his vicinity was that he had ceased living with his plural wives but bat under the ruling of judge powers he was found guilty of cohabiting with them and now awaits his sentence the people of utah have almost ceased to wonder at the absurdities and contradictions of the courts in their determination to punish the mormons cormons Mor mons but some may be curious to know on what peculiar quirk or quibble a man can be convicted of cohabiting ha biting with more than one woman when the evidence is conclusive that he has only cohabited with one it is done in this way proof is given that as a matter of fact a man has cohabited with one plural wife but not with anyone adv one else cohabitation n with the legal legac wife is then presumed presume conviction thus is made easy there is a certain amount of plausibility to this in law cohabitation with a legal wife is presumed but that presumption is not proof and it may be be set aside by evidence if evidence of non cohabitation is adduced the presumption fails in the snow case on the second trial the court instructed the me lury jury that mat with the legal wife wag was to be presumed after the evidence had proven non cohabitation thus the rule of law was ruthlessly trampled upon and the instruction of the court was tanta mount to an order to convict in the taylor case the evidence of cohabitation was with the legal wife so the tactics resorted to in the sno snow case would not answer and the habit and repute of marriage with the women named in the indictment could not be made to appear the evidence of the witnesses for the prosecution went to show that not only the habit but bat even the repute ceased after the passage of the edmunds law the repute being that mr taylor no longer lived with his plural wives how did the court manage in this emergency here is the report of what he said to the jury after similar instructions to those in the snow case 1 I charge you further that no public act of divorce or proclamation that he had put away the women will be sufficient ent to hold him guil guiltless if you find beyond a reasonable doubt that he lived or cohabited as I 1 have defined the term during the time mentioned in the indictment with the women or any of them named in the indictment all such matters would be immaterial the question before you is did they live or cohabit as the term has been defined to you during the time named in the indictment note the words we have put in italics the definition of cohabitation which the jury were to follow boilow was not that of the supreme court of the united states b but ut I 1 as P I 1 1 0 orlandos landoW Or biando W po powers aers have defined the term 11 and they were to find the defendant guilty if he had in that sense cohabited with any of the women named what is the meaning of Is any n 11 it I 1 is i s one out of many there therefore bore as the defendant had cohabited with his legal wife he was to be found guilty and was found guilty on those instructions of cohabiting ha fa with more than one woman I 1 The there has been beena a great deal of talk about some method by which a poleg adist could announce to the world that he has ceased his polygamous relations and it has been argued against some defendants that neither nad had given any public notice that he had dissolved his polygamous re relations 1 a 11 but where is the use of attempting to do so under the ruling ot judge powers A decree of divorce from the legal wife and a public proclamation la of separation from the plural wives make no difference A defendant fen dant dAut if he does not dwell under the same roof with either of those women associate with them or either of them or it he should call occasionally at their houses and enquire after their children would be just as liable to conviction and punishment I 1 as if no public act of separation had d taken place it seem that so long as a man is a mormon and has married more than one woman he is to be punished whether the law touches his case or not cohabiting or not cohabiting makes no difference the sentence appears to be be damned it if you do be damned if you dont and the only safety lies in keeping out of the way the wisdom of those who foreseeing the course that would be pursued aud and perceiving that there was no likelihood of a fair trial or a j adjudication have quietly placed themselves in retirement for a season be evident to all who see things with two eyes and a level head |