Show THE V U S VS JAMES EARDLEY TRIAL FOR FOB UNLAWFUL cohabitation NO KO EVIDENCE AG THE DEFENDANT the ciric attorney interposes and obtains a verdict of not mot Clui guilty liy today to day the case of the united ignited states vs james eardley of this city was tried in the third district court the indictment alleged that from dec 1 1882 to april 1 1884 the defendant lived with his wives G and martha priest eardley in salt lake county the defendant was arraigned and entered a plea of not guilty the names of the witnesses were thin then called the alleged second wife martha priest eardley failing fading to re after some little time was spent by mr dickson in looking for papers in the case he announced to the court that lie he felt beit sure the witness had been arrested and placed under bonds for her appearance he had bad found the warrant of arrest but could not find the subpoena which was served seivel or the bonds that had bad been idled filed deputy smith remembered making the arrest anest and clerk mcmillan had a distinct distie ct recollection of a bond having been given and that a man named nam t d wayman had bad been one of the sureties eureti es mr dickson believed the amount of the bond was the ine name of the witness was then called three times and there being no answer the district attorney said daid 1 I ask that the bond be declared forfeit the court issued an order foral forfeiting biting the mythical bond after another delay mr dickson announced his bis readiness to proceed with the case and the following folio wine jurors were called bo bowman aman cannon RW R W crane frank mclaughlin wm win meray mckay edward berry joseph foreman charres charles J M harvey thomas davis george wells cark joseph foster J M harvey thomas davis and jo joseph se h foreman were peremptorily c challenged h am en ge d by the defense J B wilson R P martin and S C pancake were then called and accepted james W eardley was the first witness he testified I 1 am the defendants son in my y mothers name is zur viah she lives ilves at main street I 1 have not lived at home for six or seven t years mother has seven living children five of f whom live with her hei now theyan they ierg also defendants children I 1 have heard my father speak of his hia marriage with my mother d during aring the time named la the indictment I 1 often visited fathers house that was before he be went away he was absent about two years I 1 have known know ii martha priest about ten years during the time named in the indictment she lived about a block from my mothers she has four children the eldest ten the youngest five or six years old I 1 have not seen been the youngest child for about six months he was in my mothers store 5 I 1 ne never aw any of marthas children childred chil dreu at my fathers house but have seen t them hem at the store I 1 have been to marthas house but never saw my father there I 1 have not nor visited her house for three or four years I 1 never west there at my fathers request marthas children bear the family name of eardley my father lived at home do abot know of his living a part of his time elsewhere have never heard him call martha his wife I 1 do not know whether or not ahe paid for the goods she purchased in the store I 1 never heard her talked of in the family as aa the defendants plural p lural wile she was called marthe martha I 1 remember having seen martha in mothers house three or four years ago a D mr ickson dickson E was martha understood in your fathers family to be his wife objected to by the defense for the re reason that no act of recognition was asked for Oyer overruled ruled witness to mr dickson there was nothing further than imagination we knew nothing of it mr dickson do you recognize marthas child johnnie as your half brother objected to objection Ob jestion sustained witness to mr dickon I 1 dont know that he is I 1 aint know whether her other children are ray my half balf brothers or othera slid and sisters or not the defendant hs is my father lr mr dickson hav do you know that I 1 witness he told me so nobody told me johnnie eardley was my fathers son I 1 never beard martha maitha spoken of as aa my faun faili is wile aile I 1 do not dot know whether or 01 aul ajol she is reputed among the neighbors on en page to be his wife lie I 1 may have said to the araud jury that oat it was wag that thai the deleu defendant daut was i he be lather of mar thas children I 1 am under the impression that soine people think so witness to mr richards the time I 1 spoke of when martha wasat the de lend ants house was belore before the first date named in the indictment I 1 have never seen them together since to mr dickson martha is sometimes called by the name of eardley some people belli we that is her name I 1 think it if anyone asked me tor for martha F ardley fardley I 1 would imagine they referred to martha priest I 1 do not remember my fattier calling her his wife my father did not take lake martha on a a with him or bring her back she lived at mothers a few months 12 or 14 years ago she had no children then she yh was waa there in the capacity of a servant girl I 1 dont know kaow when her eldest child was born it must have been four years after I 1 dont know whether anyone but her children live with martha my fathers brother lived on the same block mary E eardley te testified stifled I 1 am a daughter of defendant and zerviah eardley I 1 have known martha priest 10 or do not remember her living at my moth matheis mo theis eils house have not seen her tor lor six or seven months know her children they come to the store and the house I 1 never saw them there when defendant was home from november 1882 to the summer of 1864 lather was home most odthe of the time dont remember hearing bearing father speak of Mart marthas hols children nobody told me to cosay say dont remember go o by the ume L wc ot eardley martha and 0 her er unil children iren get goods from the store iu i u t they are am I 1 charged to martha 17 1 do 0 not cot know r who pays for them martha has been at lathers house this was while he was absent in england he be went a year before we were called before the grand jury father seldom went into the store when he was home I 1 dont remember hearing him speak of martha never heard bear a mother call her his wife nor had an any y conversation about their relationship I 1 do dont nt know whether her children are i elated to us they are treated as relatives I 1 never asked any questions about them never heard defendant call them his children nor them call him father h he e called them by their oven niven name I 1 have been to marthas house never saw aw delen defendant daut there he lived liv ed home never saw b him im in company with martha her children are treated as other children are I 1 dont know whether martha is reputed to be lathers wife I 1 believe shy she is annie eardley testified lied I 1 am a daughter of james and zerviah eardley I 1 live home am acquainted with mariba manha priest have seen seau her at my mothers store her children came there too father worked out in the yard and seldom came in the store I 1 never saw martha pay tor lor any goods they were charged to her her children are treated created as are others who come there beyer saw them in my fathers presence that I 1 remember but may have done never heard them call him father never heard beard martha called Eard leyl in my lathers bathers house do not know whether sue she is reputed to be the defendants wife never saw saw him in company with her that I 1 remember mrs zerviah eardley was sworn as a witness mr dickson do you know martha priest W atness ness ani am I 1 compelled to testify against my husband birs bandy the defense offered the objection that the witness herself declined to testily against her husband mr rawlins stated that he desired to argue the case the court said the question had bad been discussed on a former occasion and would allow the witness to answer any fuestion lu ju estion except as to confidential communications made by the defendant witness to mr dickson I 1 know mai maitha tua priest she lived with me as a hired girl ya 12 or 14 years ago I 1 edgag engaged ed her myself she ame there with her sister my hus vand was not acquainted with her before then I 1 do not mot know whether I 1 discharged her or she left my LUS baud never occupied a room with her in my house she moved from my house to the ath ward there thera was an other family in the same house she rented and raid paid for fer the rooms herself I 1 suppose I 1 I 1 dont know whether she had money or not I 1 may have visited her once or twice her first child john awas was born there it was an infant when I 1 birst saw it I 1 never saw my husband there my husband lived at home with me I 1 do not kno w who lives with her now I 1 visit her very seldom I 1 do not know whether her children are my husbands or not they are reputed to be his children martha is regarded in the family as his wife never beard her spoken of as such I 1 never called her his wife I 1 have never heard ker her children call the defendant father he called them by their christian name they may have called him papa mar thas chals youngest child was born in 1881 have seen my husband in marthas presence she gets the supplies for her family at the store they are charged but not paid lor for she is never asked ta to pay to mr richards richarda have heard johnnie address the defendant as papa mr dickson said he believed that was all the testimony he had to offer but would decide by 2 p m to which hour hoar the court took recess upon the reassembling of the court mr dickson said he had been unable to find auy any additional evidence for the prosecution the tb showed no cohabitation during the veriod named iu in the he therefore requested the court to instruct the jury to return a verdict of not guilty which was accordi accordingly ugly done and wa r eardley was sat at liberty |