Show THE examination of the charge against john Q cannon miss louie wells married to the defendant after her sister was divorced the preliminary examination in the ease cate of the united states vs john Q cannon was conducted before commissioner mckay today to day hon F 8 richards appearing for the defendant de and district attorney dickson for the prosecution when the case was called this morving morning the defendant waived the reading of the complaint and entered a plea of not guilty the witnesses were sworn wod and mr dickson called louie wells when the lady stepped forward he asked have you any middle name louie M 11 was the reply mr richards inquired of the witness what is your full name the ans answer being 11 louie wells cannon at the request of mr dickson all of the witnesses except the one testifying were excluded from the room louie wells cannon in response to questions by the district attorney tes te stifled titled I 1 ama married husbands name is ohn john Q cannon I 1 was was married on september salt bait lake city mr dickson at what place mr richards we object to that it is immaterial the fact of the marriage is the issue the commissioner overruled overused over ove used ruled the objection jec tion Witness to mr dickson I 1 kasimar ried at john Q cannons house I 1 think the day of the week was thursday it was on september between 12 an 1 mr dic dicksen sen who married you mr richards that is immaterial if they were married it makes no difference who married them the fact face is shown objection overruled witness abram cannon mr dickson 1 I ask for a subpoena for him to witness who were present witness my mother mo my sister annie was not in the room I 1 saw her in the house that day I 1 went there that morning mor nina dont know the hour went with mother in a buggy I 1 think I 1 drove started from my mothers home it was wa 3 my si sisters or al mr r cannons horse it had been at our house a month or two some one in the stable got eotis it ready mr dickson how were you dressed when you were married mr richards we object to such questions as that it makes no difference what dress she wore let the district attorney get at the tae lacta tacta relating to the marriage or the charge in a ais co complaint and not scatter all over as to what people aure ore when it has no bearing on the case mr dickson who had shown considerable sid erable surprise at tile the evio evidence ence I 1 want to test the truth of this story I 1 want to know it if ibe be witness is telling the truth the commissioner you may answer the question witness to mr dickson I 1 had on brown dress aress my hair was dressed as it is now had bad no gloves on had no wrap or shawl on ausaw I 1 saw my sister gt the house she met us as there mr cannon was out in the yard he came and assisted us to slight alight I 1 think I 1 dont abow whether be went into the house then or not I 1 dont think abram cannon was there before me he was not sent for but called afterwards when I 1 left home that day I 1 intended to get married mr Air dickson why did you hesitate when I 1 asked you that question witness I 1 suppose I 1 may think may I 1 not we bail bad made no positive arrangement ran rau gement to be married on tut that day aay the defendant had proposed pro poised marinake prior to that time I 1 dont know that I 1 lad had either accepted or rejected the proposition pio position mr dickson did he propose more than once mr richards what has that to do with tile the case it is the fact nase that is wanted and not howman no 11 times he proposed objection oly ova ruled witness he had spoken to me M nic e than once he made a proposal of ws marriage rr i age but bat once the evening before a at t mothers home there was no one resent present but he and 1 I it was after nark dark I 1 told him I 1 would think of it or something to that effect mr dickson what olid did he say mr richards the defense objects to that the question is an improper one tt is going a little too far to ask asic tor lor the manner ot of a proposal of marriage such a thing is beyond all precedent mr dickson did he suggett any time or place tor the cenemo ceremony ny witness no mat was no not t deela decided e d he left early in the evening eve nigg I 1 do not nor remember exactly when aon he came he had a buggy I 1 ha always lived at home before that time mr dickson had ehfe W defendant everal ever stopped ped 1 in that your marriage triai 11 I 1 mr f richards I 1 object to t tha question it is immaterial it makes bodif no gif ferenee what the defendant defenda 4 did wore before then he is on trial for pa p gamy that should be the jobje object c ifie J aua ter rogations rotations rogat ions mr dickson 1 I have a rig ri V know of the intimacy of the par a before this date if their re at 0 should prove to have haie been intimate t aames right to know whether th g were outside of the marriage re a or not not mr richards still it is immaterial in 0 14 rial the prosecution have plenty 0 or witnesses to prove the marriage and the district attorney At attorney torne y has no right light to do as he is doing we do 40 not care cara for the present question but to following up that chat line the question is absolutely and woolly i incompetent commissioner there might be a different state of things than has been hero here shown there way may have bearup been prior marriage wiam witnesses in thee cases dont like to tell all the circumstances in this case there tain reasons for issuing toe th e wa but it was withheld for a t time ime 1 ing there might be some do debt bt first wife was divo divorced re ed and aa next day dav he married her s sister aste iste r think all the circumstances should come out and I 1 am disposed to if let them do so mr richards 1 I think the prosecution has no richt right to go the question of fo polygamy agamy he can ask whether there has been a prior ar ariage but he be has no rie right to scan kral mize the witness I 1 dont object to anything material to the issue commissioner the peculiar circumstances of this case influence tho the adur court to get at all the facts mr dickson I 1 dont ask the question for the purpose of scandalizing this woman I 1 think she was wan married long before the date she aw actis I 1 think the circumstances pre sappy a marriage and think I 1 cau can show it I 1 want a continuance now I 1 w want t t t go to the district court commissioner cant varian conae camet you want the witnesses kept bep separate natt and if you only go on half an hour acx time the case will take four oi or five aie days I 1 it was finally arranged that mr Vs rian should go to court and the examination continued witness to mr dickson he and his wife boarded there after they came am home from germany they als also 0 s stayed there at other times he never stayed there all night except when his wife was with him until she went to san Fran francisco iseo last august she was away four or five weeks he stayed a abw fow nights at mothers house I 1 do not know now how often it w was not half hal fAlip 3 time he be went to san francisco to meet annie I 1 do not know the number of nights he be stayed at mothers my bedroom is ia u upstairs pst a rs in the northwest corner ef the b bonse ue mr cannon did not occupy any room he be slept on tho the porch be was not in my bedroom bed loom when 1 I was there neither in that nor in any other h onse I 1 am quite sure of that and also that we were married september I 1 do not got remember lits his speaking of marriage marrs prior to september ath it is marrale possible po q le elnior be did didong I 1 do not know that he did clid I 1 leave no do thonol of such a thing I 1 saw my sister wore define we were married 1 I 1 knew me ie was divorced mother told IN gie the defendant also told in tola me and I 1 knew toe the reason for it had bad no personal knowledge of the dose abut but had been informed of it borto abw to the time he proposed mar iw I 1 knew my sister nad had obtained a morce on the grounds of adultery I 1 remember speaking of it to him tie je divorce may have been mentioned rowing this I 1 married him next day deft home and expected to be mar bedi od but was not positive I 1 would ye pe gone to the he house bouse if I 1 had bad BOC in eded to marry him I 1 thought thong tit it OR light happen hap en that day he first spoke sl the e ath about marriage it id dd him I 1 would think of i it mother nd ad I 1 went down next day and mr Conon andl and I 1 we were married remarried I 1 made nia as to the reason my sister W wen divorced ivor ced mr dickson here died for a for dr benedict pas was not a matter of in indifference differ cal to i le ie but I 1 did not speak to d effrat W mr kr dickson were you ever in the house mr air richards we object to that objection beet on overruled verr e witness yes sir air I 1 have hav been there teral peral times I 1 have been baptized tere jere it was over four years ago I 1 to not remember when I 1 was next tere ere mr r Dickson For what purpose did ou 1 go the next time 1 mr 1 r richards richardo I 1 goject if it is any ling connected with the marriage I 1 11 hilll U not object overruled witness w 1 dont don t know the purpose 0 D not recollect at present I 1 was etere ere a third time six or seven years IP I 1 have not been beem there within three pars fears that I 1 remember the last time I 1 ns there was when my sister was hurried I 1 have been in the logan log an temple emple once in 1884 I 1 do not kemem ter be whether therit it was spring or autumn I 1 went lent by train my brother J V F wells accompanied me lt it was on a weekday week day we e went to see the temple john Q conon was not there prior to the loia by of september i 1 never went through a marriage ceremony of any igind ilind recognized by the church with bohn john Q cannon I 1 mrs annie W cannon called she testified 1 I 1 kasnot was not present whency when my lifter was married to the defendant I 1 did not know they were married the defendant never told me of it they were ere not married in my house bouse when I 1 was there I 1 was homo home during last september I 1 do not know positively that they w were re married there I 1 did not witness the marriage but I 1 think taink there was one saw them there and has worn a wedding ring I 1 desired that they should be married because they wanted to 1 I have thought for some time they wanted to I 1 be they loved each other he once tta ke to me about it i mr dickson how long is it since gat time witness must I 1 answer that mr dickson yes witness I 1 do not know that be particularly ticul arly said so never heard louie say my any anything thing about it I 1 thought they wanted to and spoke of it I 1 did most moat of lof the speaking thee peaking I 1 do not noi remember the first time I 1 spoke of it mr dickson cruickson ickson sharply do not look it mr cannon witness he fie is not looking at me I 1 yoke ke to him more than a year ago he Z ud not admit being in love her I 1 joke ie to him more than once 1 he never S loved her I 1 desired att he should marry her when I 1 thyi ilist poke ot ol it mr dickson did it distress you 0 think that he loved your sister witness must I 1 answer thab ques I 1 bof on commissioner yes witness 1 I spoke to him of marrying er r for the simple reason that it was a lesire of my own it did not distress net he to any extent I 1 believed it right wd ind I 1 loved my sister and asked him to mar larry her I 1 along that I 1 desire such a thing I 1 have not V to him since my return kom torn san francisco nor while there br over a year he has known that I 1 de akred ahma him JA marry louie last sep imber hea not invite me loe to witness ke ie ceremony I 1 was not in lie e house when they were illumed curried I 1 was out in the yard I 1 un per stood the ceremony cere adny was to be per II 11 formed that day I 1 do not know who 11 told me I 1 under understood it was to take noce dace aud and I 1 went away with nath my baby bee then I 1 have lived at my home the pendant dant was at the farm and home otti h her mother I 1 believe the maree age was on the of september cause they were all there they une about 1030 a in I 1 tunk think the pendant was there they came in a aggy I 1 received them at the door 14 bister had hadon on a light brown dress W 4 hat they remained there over an coir abram cannon was there he cune about 11 a in the defendant h had ad no conver conversation bation with him lamy in my pres 4 abram was out in the abe yard part ol 01 me the time I 1 do de not know whether he wain ft in the house or yard when mother dmd ad sister came I 1 first desired mr cannon to marry louie for principle I 1 obtained a divorce from my 1148 husband band on the ath I 1 got the information a on which the complaint was mr richards we object to that testimony ony I 1 mr dickson 1 I want to know if this was mas the young woman suspected when mrs cannon did y yon ou get the in fountion lorin forn Atlon tIon from your husband witness ou on sunday bunday afternoon mr dickson did he be tell you with whom he had committed adultery mr richardis 1 object to it as aa a con communication by the defendant commissioner do you know anything about it witness 1 I only know the public confession and what he told me I 1 do not know of the time the place or the womba with whom the offense was committed I 1 was the only witness sworn in the tae probate court the defendant admitted that what waa wal charged was true mrs emmelyne Emmel lne B wells was called asa as a witness she requested thattie that the large crowd of men ghobad who had gathered in the court room be asked fa to retire but this the commissioner said could riot dot be done she testified louie cannon is my dag I 1 was present at ather her marriage 0 to the defendant I 1 was spoken to about it a day or so before it occurred may have heard of it three days bea before ore I 1 do not recollect where the circumstances that had occurred had such an effect on me that I 1 could not tell what went on I 1 think Mr Jr A Cannon spoke to me I 1 do not think it was the next day after I 1 was so shocked but perhaps the next he asked my consent which I 1 gave I 1 was shocked by his bis conduct I 1 bad not recovered from my grief and have not yet ett still I 1 gave my consent to marry another 0 her of my daughters I 1 do not think any one else was present pre ent it was not talked of beffie louie and I 1 do not think I 1 spoke to her about it that day there was very little said lust lust as little as would answer mr cannon may have been at my house before the marriage I 1 do not remember seeing seen him I 1 am away iway from home a great deal the marriage was on the of september I 1 think that on the thursday evening prior I 1 was at his house my daughter annies child was sick louie and I 1 drove down to annies house bouse she was there we were caring for the sick baby I 1 would not say positive it was thursday the was friday mr cannon may have been at my house hous e 6 on the evening of the ath I 1 do not know whether on the lath we came from mr cannons or from my house to my office at the time of ef the marriage louie wore a brown dress her bair hairway was dressed the same as to dav I 1 think she did not wear gloves I 1 was present at the marriage as were also john Q louie arid abram they were married between 12 and 1 Ip 91 clock I 1 remember that because I 1 am particular about people being married in the middle of the day I 1 did not remain long at the house louie has been home part of theotime the time since while defendants defendant lg wife was in san francisco he stayed a few times at my house bouse they lived there part of the time before at the time louie was married I 1 knew annie was divorced I 1 was at her house bouse that day I 1 did not remain there that night nighta 1 am sure john C cutler te testified stifled I 1 am clerk of the salt lake county probate court mr dickson do bo you know whose handwriting that |