Show I 1 ar I 1 ji i CITY L of jury law jers alad judges 14 I 1 goris FREE s it I 1 bishop critchlow is found not guilty CHAS DU N pleads I 1 11 Is casa set for trial on ron day the dinst PROF alexanderi i LECTURE merry wedding bells an vory I 1 ild vidual insults a young girl general intelligence I 1 FIRST ill COURT the bowers osse critchlow fauna not guilty tito court opened ing may at 9 30 an order as made in the case of the I 1 united states Vs jonah evans continuing it over tile term th 6 aass of the united states vs va udie bowers fornication was con tinned bir clark testified that the defend slit had been sit work on the weber can at on the day of ilard defendant was tailed to the stand ile admitted that he had len guilty of tile crime charged during the months of august and the three ill loing months of the year 1880 but denied any intimacy in jul 0 f that year or in march 61 the I 1 at H testimony tei w not cross crosso o idere the defence rested and the began the argument of tile case bar peters spoke dowly and distinctly but of the evi dence was produced and a chain of e defendant itch it impost giblo for the defence to break rog er in his argument pictured attry what an inhuman being john must be to bring his daughter into court and publish her shame to the world all for the purpose of leaking we aking vengeance upon the son of his old time friend whom he had known since 1847 ile made the t that whatever abe defendant adone previously or since the pro Be cution was bound by their election to prove that the offense offence was cona bitted on or about the of march and chev did a verdict of not guilty must bo found mr kimball made its argument and by the time he closed it was evident that the spectator i were very interested and that tile verr diet of tile jury would be awaited more than usual anxiety the court charged the j rz that I 1 n order to find a ve act i of i ity they must find first that de eu dant as an unmarried man second that jane ports was an un fontan thirdy that the offense offence was committed on or about the day of march jane the law under which this prosecution bag been brought was enacted march 3 1887 this was 1301 what is known its a continuous of fence therefore it is necessary for the prosecution to prove a certain transaction at a certain time if y 0 should find that the offense offence was c on though aft erthe passage of the law you can not convict as I 1 0 ur in ands must be drawn to the t ime selected by the prosecution in sexual intercourse it is not necessary to pro veit by e yd witnesses but by such circum stan s as would carry conviction to the em ind of any reasonable and prudent man the of jane it call not to the statutes providing that the accomplice in any crime by ilia or her tel alone convict the fellow criminal but if her statements are cor ro borated by other testimony the n YOU mav use it in connection with ill at 0 ity 11 charles F blandin charged with obtaining money under false pre ten sea was arraigned ile as 0 t a ady to plead and given him to Z court ordered II 11 I 1 P m 2 pm the court was called to order at 2 1 4 I 1 1 1 P rt lury I th N d caw brou 2 I 1 a verdict of not guilty of the united states va was called and the names of the following follo Xing jurors I 1 albert herrick peter thomps on james al thomas barney N tib bles joseph B sewell john 0 ellis W T md christian A john son A F rater christian sen james brown i ind charloff Char leff jay albert herrick was on so count of being s witnel 11 at this time thib grand jur 7 filed ai indictments J W bott desired to withdraw his ples of bot guilty an lo 10 that effect he then pleaded and june charles blandin having consulted big attorney was arraigned and plead m pot gull tva be charge of obtaining money un r e falso pretenses ills trial was set for next monday may john 0 ellis was excused as lie believed it right to have mor ethan wife it aromas 1 james if believed it wio ng to have more than onezile one wile upon examination he admitted that he idid edid not ft nf orally wrong tha lord LU there hl fol to w should give a revelation orthe aub 0 hect and there was no law against it think it would not be 11 A KC ourt do abe ravola nants orthis subject air thomas leq air for it so cords biblowitz all believe in court yes that Is tour belief thomas yes el r court welt tile epton 1 ed his belief on polygamy and was excused frank A benedic JP alancis oliver and ceorge white I 1 vere callea to M ills I 1 I 1 1 VA 1 mr bai been a member of tile grand jury at the time of find ing the indictment in this case and as therefore excused alvin fletcher was drawn peter and joseph B sowell were peremptorily by the defence J B hopkins and thomas J patten IV ero called tito latter was excused henry lewis and W F burton w ore callei a 1 I d c lial longed on their belief and ex used title completed the jury and the cam wa 8 proceeded roce eded with TI I 1 low M ith the offense offence of unla ful colial citation between the of january I 1 and june 1884 goo S peters and and ben sheeks for the defence critchlow was call she marr led to the defendant in 1861 knew elizabeth fellows elio had bought nitter from tier never know eliz ile r as abeth fellows critchlow d I 1 d not know that her husband had a second wife on being pressed closer she declined to answer mr peters did mr critor low ovee live any ith you in tile preen pa ce a third party about a 31 L no air objected to by counsel mr peters did she ever stay over night at your bouse mrs 0 I 1 understand that as I 1 am ills legal wife I 1 am exempt from ayi fyi 1 na the question was at raised as to ter having forte cited her pr of e emption by having partially test tied before she claimed the privilege while the court was looking 7 ohp authorities mr peters continued 0 examination 31 rg 0 testified that Elizal I 1 OW s ud not remained over night t tier house sine 1879 tier husband R it 2 d been absent for 0 big health here a 1 is again declined to anwer as site could not answer to things she did not know the court her to answer either yes ordo husband returned last summer from st george where lie had been work aag in tile temple did not knowd here elizabeth Fello 48 was at that time ehe was not reputed in the family as being defendants plural eife she knew that her husband had no plural wife because be had lived with witness individually for twenty seven years elizabeth never visited isit ness at lie house in 1884 nor in 1885 defendant never received tier consent to elizabeth as lis plural wife georgianna Geor glanna Crite filow sister to tha alleged plural wife and daughter in la to defendant testified that tile voc aaion of tier sister during the year and the spring of issa ads that of teaching school 0 was asked for to best rec ol lection of the time her sister quit teaching school tile courts el fo r defence objected mr peters forced its questions witness kept answering and uie court was so e k ng to get a hearing so as to rule on it e objection it was od stained wi aness had never seen defendant at ter fathers house durin g iwa and 15 did not think her sister was a married i aloman did not know the repute among the as to elizabeth being a plural wife of defendant 1 had no personal knowledge of k ew not where elizabeth was had not seen or heard of ifor three years had not seen her in of defendant exempt at meeting no eross examination george fellows atrero f t he bat witness was the no at called he had known the defendant for seven or e agh t years was father of elizabeth lie a liegel plural bif s P defendant bad been in LIS boasa t wice on cc he wanted borgan repaired remained ani for ten elizabeth was dot home at that time deafen dant was never at ills house in the evening did not know where elizabeth was bad not seen tier for three years she has no children to his knowledge t bad heard a rumor that his daughter was married people had naked him if his daughter was married did not know it to be a fact thought she would bacq let him k now no cross examination annio fellows another sister of elizabeth testified that defendant biad could not tell the exact time did not come once a week did not know whom he came to see had never spent an evening with the family be had oc cu pied the sitting room with bizzis when visiting had stayed till 11 this happened awo or abre years before she went away it was in 1883 or before did not know that elizabeth was married had headd she was married to defend alit she had gone to salt lake some time after defendants visits did n 0 t know that defendant had ganeto salt lake at that time her sister had allent som a evenin S but no willis had n ot seen gd e fen 19 ant and her sister together since her visit to salt lake all of the witness testimony following this was and n cross examined it was he r lief that Lizzie was married mar ridd had heard nothing definite about it in the family was not interested in this matter her memory was fair if it was something Om ething in which she wal interested she would note of it had madeno notes of this affair the court took a recess for a few moments 3 I 1 I 1 11 re L cheed lio I 1 ha known n d ant ever since he witness wit neso was born wag with ell izabeth F e low had seen her in with de fondant going fron church 0 it in they were walking arm in 1 hn seen them thus in the lat ter part of 1833 isad spring of had seen them p in at gate the rep u te among dependants neighbors in 1894 was that FIlz abelli 1 va is his pill ral eife had seen them riding together in a spring wagon did not know elizabeth hada child had repute in fa mil vias that elizabeth was lils plural w 0 cross examined istad seed together two or ahree if a joseph L garner last vit ness for the cution lie bad known 30 mcw ilia first wife was par willy acquainted will alizabeth Ul izabeth ien lows dad be defendant and her to gethair going from church had never sawn them arm in arm bad seen elizabeth going toward his house knew family ceph nong to be that was his plural wife did ot know that had a child did not know the orith ISO in n tate amily I 1 never saw bleat the housdorf goo rg 0 fellows no ross examina alon I 1 the prosecution I baw the defence rested the cae I 1 was submitted ar gement 1 be court instructed lite jury that tho aad failed to prove tile ch ar and therefore the verdict I 1 be not guilty the jury a verdict of not guilty according to the instructions of the baving tile bair A a I 1 1 L i coul ad n e I 1 until P ill at 7 W p iotis tle court resumed its seg ilou 11 its case of los 1 1 11 1 1 and all a uni lor ri sya 1 11 1111 was N rd r b tell the court ad journoud until 10 a in today to day A railroad sulfide another suicide is reported along the line ozithe S r on friday morning conductor doff wifeless remains of a man near does in nevada the bials reports that tile head was com plemely severed from the body and lay son the rails and the trunk was full length outside file track the deceased was a lumberman and it is e d that he placed bid neck on the rail M ith intent a the train was up was villiam m I 1 ian altug y and his mind had been affected since the killing luf payton at bom ten days agil I 1 at g to ani sr rd 1 4 elijat y taho mayn I 1 tito proceedings elings in the temple to AY were main y a repetition rv of tl 0 0 in all essential that athe cengr agwu was diffor clit abst f tile URI tors lieve depara atud nearly all will be cops togo morrow A part of men in b c your ill to mhd west ila I 1 hicle edoin ta be getting bigger a nd richer as the development develop mont some rich specimens vs been taken aur 1 nd the 1 short savater 1 1 the w ter dl note diore in utah tills year tito silver state re arts that many ranchers on lite big are discharging hands and given apall of raising pt or P thid am son the ekter to very low I 1 rl the not a drop running into the lake and farmers on the loer part of the meadora c annot irrigate their grain and alfalfa fields I 1 folt ce court the police bourt wats yesterday yost erday one tiet runk ap been dip curbing t oneace of the proprietor d clotel ill have a I 1 li g today to day y 4 8 L I 1 1 I 1 |