Show WHAT NEXT case of orson traca P arnold convicted on saturday on a three count indictment for unlawful cohabitation has created unusual interest in the community it is the first instance of one of those who when fiest placed in jeopardy promised to obey thie the law aiu b the future as construed by the courts being again prosecuted 1 the evidence for the prose cutin n snowed that the defendant had on a an umber number of occasions casious oc visited the house occupied by his plural wife for tile the purpose of looking utter alter his bid children and carlo caring for her ana their wants in one instance instance he stayed over night in order to nurse his bis baby edo was ill and medical treatment it was also shown that mr arnolds plural wife had accompanied blai aim to ogden where they occupied be he parate i selected by the clerk ot of the hotel where they stopped and that while there toe they did not noi even eat at the same bume table this is the sum of we tae evidence produced at the trial and upon which the verdict was based the taken in this case by district attorney JD ickson was in line liae with ois hia official career career beina merely tl stepin in advance in ia a tortuous path pata those who have been before the court on conviction for unlawful cohabitation cobabe ita have been given to understand that if they promised to obey the law in the future fas as construed gy by the courts 11 the imprisonment part of the penalty at least would be omitted and they would on account of this public declaration occupy a similar position po in relation to their plural wi wivel aeb as a man stands in toward a wife from whom be has haa been divorced divorce I 1 J judge adge fowers flatly asserted that the caume coume lor for a person t to pursue 8 ue w abo 11 0 had made the promise was to treat his plural wife I 1 as if there had been a decree ot ol divorce 41 vorce 11 now N ow comes mr dickson and throws a bombshell into the camp of those who have promised 1 by aby tile the assertion that every ery one of them should have submitted bitted a written statement to the court to the effect that their marriages with their plural wives were null and void being illegal further that they should have obtained a decree f from rom the court to the same effect according to his theory enunciated on saturday if this course had been taken conduct otherwise guilty before the law would have been innocent the utter s of this position is self evident and will ably cause a new light to beam upon those who have given the promise prom i se they having imagined that they were practically in the eyes of the law jaw in the same dame position in reference to their plural wives as in the case of parties panics between whom there had bad been a legal annalue annulment ut of the marri marriage ae tie in one instance a gentleman in connection with bis agreement to obey the law as construed by the courts stated that he be did not propose to renounce or repudiate ul bis s wives he be still held them rl an fn that relationship lation ship but would regulate his conduct so as toi to conform confor m to w what hat appeared to be required of him toe district attorney who in his bis official capacity must have been in a sense a party to this transaction declares that his acts are colored by the status whick the defendant la in that la in stance declared to be his bis position why was this ground against the polygamous polygamous status not token taken by the prosecuting Attoh attorney sey then instead of resorting to deception causing the defendant to believe he be bad taken the only step that would insure immunity from imprisonment wis was he not told that if he be had the temerity to visit his bis plural wife the fact of bis not having taken a step fin further ther would militate against him how does it look now for the district attorney to cosay say to him and all others who made the required promise that they have not gone far enough but that they must dissolve the status by another process why were they not then and there told by tae district attorney that they we were not p permitted ermit ted to treat their plural wives as a person could a divorced wife and still be innocent biu that they must act towards them as if they were snakes to be shunned lest he be who approached them with the commonest civility be tainted and destroyed by judicial judici aJ venom why did not mr dickson explain to the G AR AB visitors in his rabla rabid speech in toe skating rink that those who provided pro r c did not clear themselves fr from 0 in the meshes meshe of the law even af after ter the cases lor for which the they wera firs in jeopardy were disposed disposed dispo seg of here is what he be did say there has never been a man called fa for r sentence in the third district court or in the first or second district courts but who had the chance to go thence free without punishment of any kind if he be would but simply say from this time forward I 1 will obey the laws of the united states I 1 the first case against mr arnold who was nned fined notwithstanding cot withstanding his bis promise was a flat contradiction of that assertion mr Dick sons own position of satui day is also its antipodes tit puni A es the out of court because it prevents nim him treating one who ought to be dear to him with the commonest courtesy that he can to those for whom he has no special solicitude mr dickson is overreaching himself because he can by the perversion ot of judicial machinery obtain victories over victims who are helpless he imagines hiir hirr self essen bially powerful he Is puffed up with the plenitude of his aided by a cruelty that appears to be without bounds he not only oaly overleaps over leaps the tha meaning and latent intent of the law and by the aid of a willing court and machine jury tramples upon e egry legal leeal right of those he seeks seeks t ta taase I 1 asb sh but he treats with contempt t we decisions of the supreme court of tire the united states that highest tribunal of the land held that the polygamous status ss is not bot criminal mr dickson holda hold that it is he says griat it is the demolition of the status that is aimed at the law dieal not aim to destroy that which is legally innocent he is id losing his cunning cun Bins which has heretofore been a conspicuous constituent of his bis official operations lie he is running wild and becoming reckless being c evidently under the impression that li he e is invulnerable thip abl can readily be shown suppose mr Dick sons new theory should bs be ado adopted apted and every polygamist should make the statement in writing to the court and obtain a decree from the latter to the faiq ame effect beholds He holds that a man who does this can then treat his plural wife as he would a legal wife who has been divorced any conduct between them would be innocent under the edmunds edmunde law which does not almat meretricious conduct how much would the polygamous status be affected by that it is 18 unnecessary to reply the answer is self evident indeed the proposition may be laid down with unqualified breadth that the polygamous status cannot be reached by any legal process in existence its annihilation by that means is an impossibility A decree of court flat may ay be made but it does not demolish which never had a legal existence the most ordinary common sense might have that to any intelligent man not blinded by passion and prejudice biased as the court has shown itself to be it saw this point and sat down upon the absurdity by declaring that it was not necessary to obtain a decree of disso lation of the plural marriage tie it if there is a person in IB toe the community who wao can intelligently defend the district attorneys position let him come out of his shell he is making a record as one of the most unscrupulous and unmerciful official despots that ever disgraced the government of the united states scales |