Show THE WITT CASE The examination of the witnesses in the Witt unlafwul cohabitation case was a renewel of those scenes of prevarication and falsehood which have become so common here in Utuh In the name of religion and claiming the sanction of God for their acts men commit perjury and utter falsehoods with unblushing effrontery effront-ery Here is a specimen of this perjury and falsehood of which we speak which occurred in the Witt case yesterday We take the report from the Salt Lake Ida Id-a strong Mormon paper that it shall not appear as overdrawn The examination was of Martha Witt the alleged second wife of John W Witt Here is the account ac-count Martha Witt advanced with a firm sprightly step and testifiedI married the defendant in69 and have had four children by him the last died three years ago this spring it was born November 1st 1880 Mr Witt has come to see me a few times only in the past ten years we never separated and never had any agreement to live apart he dont come to see me very oftenperhaps he averages once a month he has come less frequently fre-quently for five years back he has not stopped all night with me for six or seven years He has not taken meals at my house for more than six or seven years The children child-ren call him father I still treat and recognize recog-nize him as my husband To Mr Richards During tho past five or six years he has called on me in the day time about once a month but has never slept or eaten at my house He has never lived with me as a husband nor I with him as a wife for the past three years To Mr Diokson This is also true of the I last five or six yearsyes Mr DicksonYet your last child was begotten be-gotten within that time was it not I Defiantly Yes it was but I have not sustained the relation of wife to him during three years Mr DWill youlook up pleasesay before be-fore your God that you have not AI do say I have not QHave you ever since tho birth of that child AI dont think I have QDo you know AI know have not Since the birth of the child Mr Witt and I talked together of living apart for the future Mr DDid not you say directly to the contrary a few minutes ago AAfter along pause I guess I did QWas that false AI guess it was QDld you know it was false AI guessl spoke before I thought Resumed The reason we did not live together to-gether was that he did not treat me right he did not come to see me often enough I told him I would not raise any more family for him QWhen the little quarrel was over did you kiss and make it up ANo sir After a pause We did makeup make-up our little differences I am friendly with him now We did not continue our relations because I did not wish to raise any more children We also had some talk about the Edmunds law soon after it passed in 1882 Mr Doh that was the reason was it of your not living together AIt was MrDWhy didnt it occur to you when I was pressing you for a reason for your not living together that you had talked about the Edmunds law AI cant think of everything once I never go out with him I recognize him as my husband because I have never had a bill from him Mr Diokson wearily That8 all t And that testimony was given to defend de-fend religion and to save the rights of conscience I There is one thing to be specially noted in this testimony and which occurs inmost in-most of these unlawful cohabitation cases which is the statement of Martha Witt that she had not sustained the relation re-lation of wife to him Witt during three years To a stranger unacquainted with the condition of affairs here there would appear to be nothing remarkable about three years being specified instead of one or two or four or five i but there is a purpose in three years and it is this The United States statute of limitations runs against the crime of unlawful cohabitation cohab-itation in just three years If anyone imagines that those who viQlate the anti polygamy law and the unlawful cohabitation cohabi-tation law are not fully cognizant of the I time necessary to bar prosecutions for i the violations of these statutes such a i person is greatly in error Living down I the statute in Utah is a regular thing and men and women are both willing I to hide their relations to each other j for three years in the hope of I avoiding prosecution It may be i asked what remedy there is for such aI condition of things There is a remedy for this living down the statute that vio1 t lations of the law may go unpunished i which is to repeal the United States I statute of limitations so far as prosecutions i prosecu-tions for polygamy and unlawful cohabi I 4 > > f > 4001 L I tation are concerned These two crimes should be made continuing crimes and the reason why the statute of limitations should be repealed so far as they are concerned con-cerned is because they are crimes which are prevalent and persistent in Utah Can a better reason be given can a better reason be asked for the repeal of the statute of limitations Even were the statute of limitation extended ex-tended as regards the time necessary to lapse to bar prosecutions for polygamy and unlawful cohabitation the people of Utah who commit those crimes would still live the statute down The only way to partially deter them is i for prosecutions to hang oer their heads like the sword of Damocles If they know that the law is impotent to punish them they will defy the law A first step to the further and more effectual enforcement of the Ed munds and antipolygamy law is to repeal re-peal the statute of limitations I |