| Show A WIFE CANNOT TE STIFf the trial of edwin D crowther Crow on an indictment for adultery was commenced in ID the third district court monlay monday april the jury was paneled impaneled im and sworn and ii lb was agreed by counsel that mrs lydia crowther wjk the defendants defendant legal wife the case was conducted by mr varian for the prosecution and hamilton coad who had been appointed by the court for the defense mrs ellen G hefferan Hefle ran crowther Crow was the fl first witness she testified fled I 1 became the plural wife of the defendant twenty years ago and have seven children by him my youngest child is fourteen months old the defendant is its father he visited me at my residence in this city frequently in 1888 and stayed overnight when the child was born he told me not to say anything about his being its father to prevent his getting into trouble ve we were supposed to be separated but he visited me frequently he received a pardon from the president some time ago but he continued to visit me after getting it my oldest child ella is eighteen to mr hamilton I 1 was not dot pleased eased with the action of the defendant fen dant in obtaining bis big pardon my child was born february 15 1889 mr crowther generally came to my house like a thief in the night I 1 know chancy kane he visited my house bouse during the month of arch 1888 and twice he called with mr crowther I 1 think he left here in april following to attend some races we had a little hearing once before bishop wolley of the ninth ward I 1 have seen a man named lancaster he called at my house for mr kane at the bishops bishop Is hearing the defendant attempted to show that he be was not the father of the child ella crowther testified the last witness is my mother and the defendant is 18 my father my father received a pardon in july 1886 he had bad been away from home a few months when I 1 first heard of it the defendant was at our house frequently the year before the birth of the youngest child one night when I 1 returned from the theatre I 1 found him in my mothers room he visited our house frequently in march 1888 mr hamilton are your feelings toward your father friendly the witness well I 1 dont know that I 1 should feel friendly towards him mr hamilton Is that because of hi his 11 getting a pardon the witness it is because he has not treated us right since the baby was born mr kane the abe party referred to by my mother was a horseman one day when it was raining very hard he tied his horse under the trees in front of our house my younger sister invited him to come in is the way we became a quainter with him ellen G hefferan was recalled and testified that after the birth of the child the defendant called at her bar house bouse twice the prosecution rested here and edwin D crowther was called by the defense he testified 4 t am the defendant in this case I 1 have resided in this city since march 1889 0 prior to that time I 1 resided at coal ville I 1 lived jived in polygamy with ellen hefferan up 16 march 1882 1 was at her house on march 10 1888 I 1 have never admitted the paternity of the child to anyone mr varian when did you leave your plural wife the witness in march 1882 mr varian and you make an affidavit that you had abandoned your polygamous practice when you applied for a pardon the witness YF yes mr varian how old is your boy tommy the Wit witness fiess seven seen or eight years old mr varian if this child was born on march 24 1883 you did not cease to live with your plural wife after the passage of the act of 1882 did you the witness not if that is so go mr varian but you took an oath that you had done so the witness yes mr varian all mrs lydia crowther Crowt ber was then called but mr varian objected to her testifying he took the ground that under the law of the united states she was not a competent witness to testify in favor of her husband at this point the court adjourned this morning mr varian argued further in support of his proposition that the legal wife could not testify in i n behalf of her husband he stated that in the case of the united states vs wm E bassett the territorial supreme court had bad overlooked a united states statute when it ruled that a wife could testify against her husu husband and mr coad took an opposite view he also argued that the competency of witnesses was regulated by territorial statute the supreme court had decided this to be the fact in the case of the united states vs T R cutler though judge zane had dissented from that ap abinion i nion judge zane decided that the territorial rule of evidence did not apply thus disagreeing with the action of the territorial supreme courtin court in the bassett cutler and other cabes he held that the legal wife could not be permitted to testify even by the consent of the defendant in a case cam of adultery edwin crowther testified I 1 am a son of the defendant in 1888 1 resided at coalville Co alville with my parents in the latter part of april of that year father was in coalville Co alville and remained there for six weeks or more he was there during abe the entire month of may to mr varian he worked with me every day except sunday during that time asa wilson te testified stifled I 1 am the defendants son in law resided in coalville Co alville in 1888 my child was buried april 4 mr crowther was not there then but came to coalville Co alville a few days later and remained a couple of months to mr varian 1 I saw him there every day during the time I 1 have mentioned he came about the middle of april he might have gone away for a aay day or two without my knowing it edward crittenden testified I 1 reside at Royt eville summit county lived in leadville in 1888 saw the defendant there in march or april saw him when he was working as his son has stated ansas to 0 mr varian are you still a member of the mornion mormon church witness I 1 acon dont it know that I 1 have to answer court you may answer witness yes mr varian do you hold any office witness no sir air mr crittenden continuing his testimony said 1 I could not dot be positive about the dates but I 1 saw him frequently about the time stated he could not have been out of town very long he might have been away two or three days miss mine sarah corless testified stifled te I 1 live in the fourth ward am acquainted with the defendants daughter by his former plu plural ral wife and also her mother I 1 have met mr kane there mrs hefferan crowther and the children called him papa Papal jl this was two years ago there were several others with me I 1 went to the theatre with miss crowther and her father on the ath of march 1888 hilss crowther went home with me that night and remained till 10 or 11 am next dext day to mr varian it is four mouths months since I 1 visited miss crowther we went to the theatre again with the defendant in 1888 later than the date I 1 have mentioned I 1 never saw mr kane there but once I 1 thought it strange to call him pap 1 I 1 did not understand that he was living there the defendant is my uncle he told boid me he would not go to the pen george crowther testified bed that his father the defendant was in coal ville villa from about april 9 1888 and remained there some time he did not know how long he was there three weeks in may I 1 I 1 dont think he coull have visited salt lake five different times in may without me he be frequently had business in the city but I 1 do not know of his bom ing in may mrs eliza corless testified I 1 live in the fourth ward am the defendants fen fend ants dauts sister know miss hefferan who was his bis plural wife I 1 saw at her house between two and three years year ago sago mr katie kane be was rather familiar he called her emall ma the children called him pa to mr varian I 1 never saw mr kane there but once I 1 knew bhe was my brothers wife and the children were his I 1 never heard anything wrong about her bar we were members of odthe the same church I 1 know knew that tha Buch tsuch a thing as may be inferred by my words was not dot aou countenance n J by the church I 1 told my brothers first wife a long time afterwards I 1 think the occurrence I 1 refer to was in october 1887 thomas corless testified I 1 saw mr kane as aa my wife has related and he seemed very familiar fe with the defendants plural wife he was called pa to mr varian they call mr crowther Crowth cr pao pa I 1 thought the actions of mr rane kane were rattier rather sociable I 1 cant tell much of what was said miss nellie crowther Crowt ber was recalled by mr tartan and testified mr kane first came to the house in february 1888 he was a casual visitor and called to see me he never dever addressed mother as Mall mahe I 1 he would speak to the children and refer to her as mammal mamma when doing so go mrs hefferan crowther the former plural wife was recalled I 1 never dever sav sa mr kane before february 1888 mr crowther and he came together on one occasion my children never called him papa I 1 say on my conscience that I 1 never had any intimacy with mr kane or any other man he never dever addressed me as 11 maia ma he may have referred to me as ma when speaking to the children ins this his closed the evidence mr varian said this case presented new and peculiar features he had had bad considerable experience in mormon cases and he never saw where one repudiated a thild this is the fl first rat instance where a man has denied the paternity of his plural wife cifes Is child it is the first ease case in the history of these prosecutions where a man holding a membership in the church repudiated his plural wife and her child if is the first time where such a man has endeavored to strike down the character of ochia his plu plural ral wife and it is the first time where a plural wife in these prosecutions has ever been accused of unfaithfulness these people were married properly as they believed and they lived together for many years now comes this man with this infamy I 1 say pay he has been living a lie for the past seven years in 1886 he obtained a pardon from the president on representations made u under oath that he had abandoned polygamy he swore that he had bad riot not sustained the relation of husband to his bis plural wife subsequent to march 22 2 1882 yet in november he addoff addresses a letter to her that shows clearly he be was maintaining his hia former relations but when the consequences of his act were likely to come u upon pon him he casts her aside and attempts to brand her as a harlot he admits that the child born in 1888 is his notwithstanding his statement under oath that upwards of a year before be had abandoned his relation the plural wife and her daughter resented the imputation he was endeavoring to cast upon them he wanted to pose before the public as A law abiding citizen yet secretly kept up the relation lation and when he is discovered he tries to throw upon her all the blame and requires her to suffer er I 1 say this is the most infamous and d contemptible defense that was ever presented in a court of justice I 1 say it ought to be rebuked by the jury and when they are done be rebuked by the court I 1 say it would be a disgrace to this jury to bring in any other verdict than that of guilty mr hamilton addressed the jury on behalf of the defendant he said he had been appointed by the court to conduct the case for the defendant and he iad h ad endeavored to do his whole duty by him I 1 admit that it is true that this is the first time where when it came to court a father has deserted eser ted his bis polygamous children I 1 say the reason creaso n for this is the theo pardon ardon granted by the president the sixth child was not born more than a year after march but within a year he called upon the mother at the times that have beer been stated on inai tation of her and their daughter the evidence has shown shawn that the defendant was not in salt lake during may 1888 PO that it is not possible for him to have been guilty as alleged As to the letter referred to it shows his hie af affection for the plural wife and her children I 1 believe that every man who believes in polygamy will in spite of all laws against it have a feeling of love for his polygamous wife and children unless his wife is untrue to him it wax was natural for hr her to claim that her husband was as the father of her child I 1 ask you to weigh the whole testimony in this ewe case and trust that you will exculpate this man from the charge against him mr varian replied in his closing argument and said that the sixth child was born more than it a year after the law of 1882 1 I am astonished that a man who had practiced polygamy and who still has a standing in the church would come bome into court repudiate his children and cast off their mother the story about mr kane bears on its face the impress of falsehood for if such a thing were going on there would be the grea greatest effort to keep it secret I 1 say that the one who would suspect his hie wife na m this defendant has done is unworthy to be called a man I 1 say a man who would cherish such a thought of the woman who had stood hv side ride for twenty years upon sub sui b a shadow of suspicion has something in b his Is composition that Js is not in ordinary mortals I 1 say it was the danger of the penitentiary that impelled him to doit thia plural wife with the years of an honest life behind her comes here bere and says to this defendant how dare you disown this little baby I 1 say that there are thousands of men here who rather than do such a thing would boull suffer the penalty of the law before intimating such a disgrace I 1 ask this jury to take a common sense view of the case and I 1 have no doubt of the result judge zane briefly charged the jury stating that if they were con vinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant bad committed the act they were to bring ina in a verdict ver dict of guilty if not the verdict should be one of acquittal at I 1 pm pin th the eJury jury retired and court took a recess after being out thirty minutes the jury returned a verdict of guilty and sentence was set for saturday april |
