| Show IN THE COURT convictions and sentences under the edmunds law today to day the first case under the edmunds law called in the third di district a court was that of the united 1 states va vs I 1 THOMAS H SMART for unlawful cohabitation the following jurors were called into t the he box v hugh anderson A 0 briggs K X F K martin M F arnett E H osmond thos venard win B I 1 ripp E 0 Wann ski H R brisacher Bri Bacher win MP P bacon E bclark PC lark J M martin the were accepted and sworn the indictment was then iben read accusing mr smart of having lived with J jane ane doe smart and huldaa lenroot smart as his bis wives from july 4 t to 0 may 1 1887 dp deputy t y E A franks was the first witness he testified tee tided I 1 am acquainted with the defendant I 1 arrested him at his bis home in salt lake county had a conversation with him at the time I 1 asked him with regard to the witnesses and he said it would be un nei necessary esar to serve them as he be intended to plead blead guilty if he could get gel a stay of till september I 1 took him out to mr pratt where he be repeated the statement ne lie introduced me to his first wife and said his bis second cifes name was huldah lenroot Ten rooi root and she was living in ih salt lake I 1 had advised him that the charge against him was unlawful cohabitation mrs huldah I 1 smart testified 1 I live in salt lake city have been there for two years lived in union salt lake county before then I 1 am married to thomas H smart was married in 1879 he living at the time marv smart vw the is still livine mr smart does not now live with me ime he be ceased about six months ago he be lived with me before then after we were married I 1 have abree children by y him he also lived with his bis first wife biln this is closed the testimony and the case was submitted on OB the judges J charge the jury by W P bacon foreman returned a verdict ot of guilty without leaving th the box and mr smart was given until 2 pm for sentence the same jurors were retained in the box without f further examination to try the charge against JOHN P WRIGHT of mill creek who was charged with living with isabella wright and tand elizabeth Ry narson as his wives from december 1 1883 to nov 1884 this indictment in this case contained three counts two of which were dismissed the defendant was himself sworn as a witness and testified that the ladies named in the indictment were his wives and that he be had lived with them as such during the period named the case was then submitted and a verdict of guilty returned sentence Sea tence was fixed for 2 p in on friday sept at the opening of court this afternoon MB SMART came forth to receive sentence in reply to the courts question as to whether he had bad anything to say he replied that he had bad no pro promises bises to make with reference to obedience to the law the court gave him dim a lecture lor for what he termed 66 defiance of the law mr smart went on to say tt am a believer in the gospel of jesus christ court interrupting I 1 dont care anything about that after af ter some further f urther conversation the court sentenced him to the full term six months imprisonment imprisons ent and a fine of and coasts when sent sentence eric was pronounced mr smart replied much obliged to you judge judaic I 1 lam atil willing to suffer er for conscience sake in this civilized land JAMES WOODS was called for sentence on a plea of guilty formerly estered by him mr woods did not dot answer to his name and the matter was deferred tit till I 1 later in n the day the case of the united states vs MILKS MILES L WILLIAMS charged with unlawful cohabitation was then taken up H K R watrous esq appeared as attorney for the defense mrs jane williams the legal wife of the defendant was unable to come to the court room and a deputy was sent to bring her in a carriage this was done at the request of the defense A jury was called and accepted by both sides A wait occurred in the proceedings I 1 and WOODS being bein present came forward and asked that he be given two or three days more time before sentence mr peters opposed the request which was d denied e a e d T ane e court then asked the defendant whether he had anything to say why sentence should not be pronounced mr woods answered that he had lived with his plural wife alone up u to the time of his arrest he thought thou ge t he be was living within the law but on being informed that he be should live with his BIS lawful wife he be had changed his bis relations aed proposed to continue io in that court you propose to obey the law mr wood I 1 will obey the laws of the united states court this is a law of the united states denning defining polygamy and unlawful cohabitation as crimes do you propose to obey that law in the future mr woods I 1 dont know what I 1 will do in the future I 1 will do as I 1 have done court coart you dont appear to be very frank and candid mr woods 1 will obey all the laws of the united Unite states dRates court the question aswill you obey this law mr woods I 1 cannot make any statement specially for the f future the court then sentenced Mr Woods to six imprisonment and to pay a fine of and costs the trial of MILES L WILLIAMS was as then resume dand the case opened tor for the prosecution mrs ellen james williams testified 1 I live in north point was married to the defendant defenda at in 1875 we separated epa rated about last march we livedis lived together as man mail and wife up to that time mr williams had a wife when I 1 married him she lives in the seventeenth Seventeen fh ward I 1 dont doat know how long she i has been there ever since I 1 have known her mr williams was living with her when he married me he has made his home with me for 11 II years vears I 1 sometimes call to see his first wife I 1 have five children the youngest three years old they are all wll wil mr williams does not live with his first wife he provides for her to mr watrous witness has not lived with his first wife for eleven years he be calls on her to take her means to provide her the necessaries nece saries of life de deputy uty boman cagnon testified I 1 aidea aided in arresting mr williams at his bis home in north point last summer eisaw I 1 saw ellen ellea james williams willams there he be told us she was his wife he said he had bad another wife re in this city but she would not axe live with him when he be went on the farm and they had not lived together for eleven years the prosecution rested its case with this witness the defendant mites milts L williams was sworn and te stifled I 1 am the defendant in this action am well acquainted quain ted with the ladies named in the indictment I 1 have been married to both of them I 1 have only provided for mrs jane williams during the time named in the indictment that is all I 1 have to do wish wih wicher her I 1 have not stayed all night might there for six years on that occasion I 1 sat up w with ith her when she was very sick I 1 have not eaten a meal in liar her house bouse for eleven years I 1 have contributed tri buted to her support to the best of my ability to mr peters I 1 married to mrs jane williams la 1853 she is still my wife as she bears my name dame she dont want to be divorced I 1 dont believe in the doctrine of divorce I 1 support tier her because of our relationship I 1 married ellen james in ID 1873 I 1 am 64 jane has no children ellen has five I 1 have not lived with jane for over 11 years the 1 arv returned a verdict of guilty and mr williams was given 15 days time before sentence |
