Show A VERDICT AGAINST THE EVIDENCE Is the result in the R B young case A jury that dare not acquit a mormon conviction on three counts in the second indictment the case of the trial on the second indictment against royal B young was concluded in the third district C court ourt today to day there were three counts in this indictment the time being segregated according to the persecutors plan the periods eing being arch march 1 tu to july 31 august 1 aw to dec 81 1885 and jan 1 1886 to april 17 1886 the following were the jury im paneled to bring in the verdict inthe in the case N cornelius cornelias hunt H A cummings E springer J M harvey geo A lowe J W campbell W W chisholm Chis hoim samuel paul T B R jones fulton haight rudolph budolph alff mr sheeks for the defense moved that the prosecution be required to elect on which count they would proceed to trial jos 0 young youg was the first witness and testified I 1 am defendants brother I 1 know his wife mary pratt young the defendant has resided with her during the past year mrs young has tour four caudr children en the youngest two years old ag agnes aes ues mcmurrin young w was as called since march 1 1885 have lived in this city I 1 am married to the defendant he has visited me about once a week generally sometimes not so often escarc oscar C Vandercook called lam a deputy US U S marshal I 1 a assisted in ia serving a warrant on fimma mma rawlings Bow lings on april 16 1886 it at her house it was about am captain green greenman man was admitted to the house we looked for the lady and could not flud find her we found one door locked I 1 went around and raised the window it was up about four inches I 1 raised the curtain and saw mr rawlins for the defense we object to this testimony as prying into the secre secrecies sec recies cles of the bedchamber cham which the spurt has held to be immaterial court the court may have used the term but intended to say that it was not necessary the defense insisted on their objection to the testimony the court overruled objection witness vandercook continuing near the window about six feet distant was a chair on which were a mans shirt and pants a lady said if you will wait a moment until we dress dresa we will come out mr young came out and the lady emma lists idling arting sine dul eti hilm m cross examined it was a gentle mans shirt I 1 saw pleats in front I 1 know it was a gentle gent lemans mauls shirt I 1 saw nearly all of it I 1 knew there was a man in the room I 1 did not see him I 1 heard his voice I 1 did not see him in bed I 1 could co aid not hear bear what the man said they were laughing and talking I 1 afterward saw them come out deputy deputy cuddihe sworn I 1 was with mr r vandercook on the day named mr vandercook moved the window blind and I 1 saw a mans shirt and a pair of pants in answer to vander cooks request for emma rawlings a L lady answered it if you give us time to dress we will come out 1 I I 1 I 1 saw mr young and the lady come out of the too room m a few lew min minutes u tes af after ter emma rawlings Kaw lings young was called I 1 am one of tiled the defendants V feud ants wives have been married 11 years have had three children they bore bare my husbands husban ds name cross examined since march 1 1885 1 have not lived or cohabited with mr young objected to by the prosecution objection sustained capt J W greenman was sworn and sald said I 1 am a deputy U S marshal marsh 41 was with vandercook and cuddihe on april 16 1 I lad had the warrant for emma rawlings Baw lings young I 1 went to the house and was admitted by mr pratt I 1 went in and searched the house I 1 found one room locked mr pratt did not know who was in the room vandercook went to the window and heard him threaten to come in through the window a lad lady r replied that if he be would wait until 1 she I e dressed e ased she would come out mr young and the lady afterward came out it was about a quarter to six in the borni morning il emma rawlings Baw lings young yeung le ie callea the house I 1 was in belongs to me I 1 obtained from it mr barney objected to by the defense objection overruled cross examined by defense I 1 had been there two evenings I 1 had not lived there for several months nor had mr young visited ms me heft I 1 left in january 1885 mr young has not lived with me since mr pratt rents tae house all but one room he pays the rent to me or to mr young the prosecution rose cution rested their case M W W pratt was called for the defense he testified tes titled on the bitti of A april I 1 lived in emma rawlings youngs house I 1 rented from her on april lt 16 1 I remember the deputies having been there I 1 was home all night before besides my family emma rawlings Baw lings young was there in her own room my brother inlaw in law mr driggs came after we went to bed he has bee been there frequently he stayed there all night and slept in the dining room cross examined I 1 knew emma rawlings young was there the evening before I 1 did not tell the officers she was not there I 1 retired between 9 and IUD P in emma rawlings young was called I 1 know mr driggs he came to the house bouse about 11 pm he slept in the dining dinin groom room he came into my room was there about an hour talking 11 there was a fire in the room ir young came about 6 in the i morning nor ning before I 1 was up he came to tell me the buggy would be ready in a few minutes I 1 had sent for the buggy mr young told me the deputies were there and came in the room mr driggs coat hat and boots were in the room I 1 had bad forgotten his name I 1 had 11 no 0 lady friends with me mr pratt was expecting mr driggs if there had been a shirt there I 1 would have known it this closed the testimony for the defense and the case was submitted without argument mr varian vanan said the prosecution relied for conviction on cohabit ion for the first two counts with mary P young and agnes mcmurrin young and on the I 1 last ast count with mary P young and E emma mma rawlings young the judge charged charged the jury that if they believed the defendant efen dant cohabited with the women or any two of them they should find him guilty if the they y found only on one or two counts count 81 they should specify which it was not necessary to prove sexual I 1 intercourse n ter er course coarse or that the defendant lived pei permanently with his wives nor was it necessary that they should occupy the same bed baid if he was married to them and aad continued to recognize the marriage and recognize them as his wives and if he visited and associated with them as his wives that was sufficient to constitute cohabitation the defense excepted to portions of the charge the j jury ry retired at 1125 and returned ned in I 1 a 20 minutes with a verdict of guilty on all three counts mr dickson asked that time be fixed for judgment in both cases mr legrande asked that the first be suspended pending a motion for a new trial mr D ickson dickson demanded sentence in both cases and june 1st ast was fixed on as the date of judgment |