Show I 1 TO DURANCE VILE Cannon Musser and Watson Get the Benefit of the Law Six Months and a 8300 Fine for Living Their Religion Cannon Thanks ttod lie HilS Ills i Manhood if not Ills Liberty c I The Defendants Escorted to the Chateau d Ireland this Afternoon The Third District Court room was jammed from rail to doors this morning by a restless curious crowd attracted by the announcement that Angus M Cannon Can-non and A Milton Musser both of whom were lately found guilty of the offense of unlawful cohabitation and J C Watson who pleaded guilty to the same offense would receive their sentences One of the reasons for the jam was the rumor that had been circulating for the last few days to the effect that Angus M Cannon would address the Court relative to its rulings in his case This rumor combined with the widespread notoriety of the cases was the cause of the immense crowd that gathered around the doors of the courtroom court-room loner before the hour for opening arrived and which surged in and completely com-pletely filled the loom the moment the doors were opened Promptly at 10 oclock Judge Zane ascended the bench and directed Marshal Ireland to open court after which District Dis-trict Attorney Dickson reminded the Court that today was the time set for passing sentence on Angus M Cannon convicted of unlawful cohabitation Judge Bennett then announced that Mr Arthur Brown desired to move for anew a-new trial in the case on the grounds that the Court erred in instructing the jury also in excluding evidence evi-dence tending to benefit the defendant de-fendant also that the juror A M Johnson was disqualified from serving asa as-a juror from the fact that he himself had lived in the practice of polygamy and further that the Court erred in overruling the objections to the framing of the indictment in-dictment These objections were argued by theI I defense and prosecution to considerable length but the Court overruled the motion for a new trial on the grounds that the objections of the defense were insuflicient to warrant supposition that the Court had erred regarding the exclusion of evidence I and that the time to object to the juror was when he was being examined as to his qualification There was nothing to show actual malice or bias on the part of the juror The motion for a new trial being overruled over-ruled the Court directed ANGUS M CANNON To stand up and addressed him as fol lows The CourtAs yoi are aware the jurors who tried the charges against you found you guilty and the motion for a new hearing having been entered and overruled over-ruled it becomes the duty of the court to pronounce the judgment of the law Have you anything further that you desire to say before judgment if so say it Mr CannonNothing I Judge Zane then went on to say that the law gives the Court quite a wide discretion dis-cretion in punishments for offenses like this imprisonment in the penitentiaries for a period of six months and a fine of 300 imprisonment without the fine or the fine without imprisonment That being the case the Court would be very glad if the defendant could suggest that I would enable it the Court to exercise I its discretion It was also proper for the Court particularly in cases that are continuous con-tinuous in character like unlawful cohab itation to inquire of the defendant as ito i-to what his purposes might be in respect I to obeying the law in future and inre to his advise to spect others This was I not done for the purpose of humiliating the accused for the or purpose of extracting ex-tracting from him under the pressure of I circumstances any statement of any I kind The accused was at perfect liberty I to he chose Of answer as course if a man charged and convicted of a crime says that he intends to obey the law in future or that he intends thereafter to cast his influence upon the side of law it should be taken in his favor and ought to be so considered by the courts and if a man so convicted should in good faith I declare his intention to live within the law in future the court would hf disin chned to impose imprisonment in the penitentiary If there were palliating circumstances the court would like to know of them before passing sentence The defendant then arose and said it I had been a rule of his life since he was married to make his acts the evidence of his good faith and to make I I 1 his conduct as a citizen the evidence of his loyalty to his country Since he had taken the oath of allegiance to this coun try laws had been passed making cer tain practices in which he believed crimes lie had closely scanned the evi dence of witnesses who had testified in his case and was convinced that thr rr > was nothing brought forth to show that since those laws had been passed he had ever violated them The witness Clara Cannon had testified that she was his wife priorto flie passage of the Edmunds law but had not lived with him as such since The only evidence that had been produced tending to show that lIe was violating the law was that of his son George M Cannon who could only that he had heard his father state that say I he had married his wiyes before the pas sage of the law against it The evidence of his life since the passage of the Ed munds law had been reviewed in the court and of that he could nothin Mr say nothing Cannon closed by stating that he awaited with calmness and serenity the action of the Court But for him to stand up and say what he would do in I the future I unl he could not I now submit and humbly bow to the decrees of this court trusting to be able to bear I up under any punishment that be may j inflicted I and 1 thank God that I have erty not lost my manhood if I have my lib I trfvThe The CourtI infer from your remarks that you have nothing further to say CannonNo Taking that fact into consideration der the circumstances un I the Court cannot I I give you less than the full I 1 penalty Of the law I you are S sentenced to pay a fine of StfW and to six months in the I I peniten I I barCounsel I Counsel for should be the defense asked that bail granted pending the motion for a new trial but the motion nied was de I A MrLTOJf MUSSER Was then I called Counsel for the defense moved for a new trial about on the same I grounds as in the Cannon casa The motion was overruled for the same sons as stated before rea I Mr Musser to then stood np and in reply the question as to whether he had thing to say before sentence was any replied that he had prepared passed a statement which would be I read for him by Mr Stayner Stayner came Permission forward being i u read granted Mr Mus Mr I sers statement of which the following is a synopsis In view of having done in the past according to his best understanding all that he thought was required of him asa as-a lawabiding citizen and now finding that his conduct has not had the warrant of the Court he felt justified in asking the Court to definitely and specifically define what line of conduct would be correct cor-rect to pursue when he should t be released from the pen where he was about to cheerfully go for holding out his wives to the world as wives without any attempt to conceal the relationship His wives and children were as dear to him as the wife and children of his Honor I doubtless were to him and had equal claims upon him the defendant for pro I tection but he desired the Court 10 lay down some specific rule of conduct as a guide for him in order that he might not get intothe same trouble again when the time for which he was about t to be sent up had expired After this statement was read Mr Mus ser personally stated that it having been his desire in the past to live within the law and having failed to do so he would be glad if the Court would give him some instructions as to what his conduct con-duct should be when he returned from the Bastile in which he soon expected to be incarcerated In reply to this the Court stated that it would be necessary for him to live with but one woman as his wife The law did not forbid him from bringing up his children as best he could nor from supporting sup-porting his other wives if he desired to do so The Court further stated that from the tenor of the statement read it was not the intention ol the defendant 10 obey the laws in the future and it was the duty of the Court to give the full sentence as provided by the law namely 300 fine and six months imprisonment j c WATSON Who pleaded guilty to the charge of unlawful cohabitation came next and in reply to the question regarding regard-ing his future conduct replied I have nothing to say Let the law take its course He received the same sentence as the others namely 300 and six months When the prisoners were being removed re-moved Mr Cannon addressed the large crowd assembled in front of the Wasatch building calling on the Lord to bless the people who loved the Lord and lived their religion His remarks were received re-ceived with a mixture of cheers and groans but there waas nothing of the nature na-ture of a disturbance II |