| Show BAILEY discharged lots lote of scrambling but no lavi evidence gathered the examination of george B t bailey ot of mill creek salt lake county on toe charge ol 01 unlawful cohabitation was held before commissioner norrell today mr peters prose prosecuting cating and mr moyle defending defea ding the first witness called by the prose 4 cution cation was mrs elizabeth bailey she testified that she was the legal wife of the defendant and upon refusing to testify f urther further in the case was excused win B humphrey Humph humphrey of salina sevier county testified rep my r wife is the daughter of the defendant and his wife elizabeth we were married four years ago and live in salina we were at his house a year ago last spring lust just before he went to the penitentiary we were there two weeks I 1 do not know where he has lived since he came from prison so far as I 1 know he has lived at mill creek I 1 never heard beard of a change I 1 used to know elsie M A bailey ten years ago she was living with the defendant in the same house with the rest of the family she was there after he be went to the penitentiary tent iary she was living th there e r tour four 1 years ago a 0 I 1 dont know OP w when en she belt left that house bouse or where she lives now I 1 understood der stood she lived on her farm halt half a mile from mr balleys baileys she moved to that phaoe while the defendant was wal in prison I 1 only know from correspondence with the family I 1 have talked with the defendant within the past few days about the rest it was only a casual reference to the fact I 1 have not seen elsie for about six weeks I 1 was passing her house bouse at that time and saw her there did not have any conversation with her may have passed the time of day as I 1 was going along I 1 had bad not seen her before since 1886 have not seen her at defendants house or seen him at her home she was spoken of as having been his plural wife do not know how bow long this repute has existed her children bear the name of BI bailey ey I 1 never ever heard her called by any at other e r name line than elsie she used to b be cal called I 1 ed elsie eil e bailey I 1 dont know that she is now in aidini biding have seen her children at mr baileys bailey s to mr moyle i 1 do not know whether mr bailey has hap introduced elsie as his wife since june 1886 do not know anything of the repute since that date mrs alice bailey te testified stifled I 1 am the defendants daughter in law i have lived about two miles from his residence d ence have been at his home a few times d during the pasty past year ear have been married three months and now live in part of the defendants house his bis wife and daughter live th there ier e the defendants family occupy alv five e r rooms 0 0 ms have seen elsie balley bailey and ancl am slightly acquainted with her four years ago she lived jived at the defendants ts I 1 believe do not know when she moved from there do not know the repute in the bailey family but I 1 suppose she is his plural wife never heard the family speak of tier her as his wife they call her elsie I 1 do not know where she is now have been at her house bouse once in november last do not know who supports orts her have never seen the defendant lenfant in her company or heard him speak of her I 1 dont know an anything y about the repute in the fam family ily I 1 ionly anly suppose she is a plural wite wife dont know anything about w ere she was the day the arrest was made macle to mr moyle I 1 heard the family or ahw say anything about her being his wife mrs Mr elizabeth humphreys testified I 1 am the defendants daughter know elsie bailey four years ago she was his plural wife heard beard of any to salina lipri years ago abd d visited fathers family in 1886 and again last christmas do da not know the xe se lation father has susia sustained ined to elsie since his release from prison she was married to him 20 years ago saw paw her about a week before christmas at her own home I 1 was passing with in aguer and said good morning moraine to her dont know whether father treats her as his bis wife or not mr peters remarked that the former ludi ciment against the defendant was dated april 30 20 1886 and the proof showed him technically guilty for the month follow following ln the Commissioner said sald that as the complaint dated from july julya 1 1886 he be would discharge the defendant and it was so ordered |
