Show AND STILL THEY COME William W Galbraith as a Construc tionist His Ideas of the Edmunds Law The Five Count Case Against John Tate i Continued Until the 30th Instant James Higgins Tried on a Qnintrupl IndictmentOne Count Dismissed The wheels of justice were set going once more at the Third District Court today and despite the retrogade influence influ-ence of unwilling witnesses with their evasive answersa sufficient number of revolutions were made to turn on two martyrs before the noon recess was taken The first case called was that against WILLIAM W GALBRAITH Indicted on one count of unlawful cohabitation cohab-itation The defendant was arraigned and entered en-tered the plea of guilty He said that he would waive the statuary privilege of taking two days for sentence and was ready for the judgment now The Court then asked what were the intentions of the defendant as to the future I The defendant replied that he was a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latterday Saints and as such he did not think that he could promise He said that he had tried to obey the law in the past and had made his particular home with but one of his wives He stated that he had when the Edmunds law was first passed taken unto himself his third wife Emma Bodily and lived with her exclusively Then when it was decided in the Snow case that a man must live with his first wife he I CALLED A FAMILY COUNCIL And it was then agreed that he should live with his first wife and he had done so ever since Mr Dickson then asked defendant if it were not true that the second wife Emma Flint had a child two months oldTo this the witness answered yes and I in explanation said that the construction I he put upon the Edmunds law was that it referred simply to a mans living and residing with more than one woman and had no reference whatever to sexual intercourse in-tercourse He said he had that understanding under-standing of the law within himself and he couldnt get rid of the idea The Court differed from this view and asked defendant whether or not he would promise to obey the law in the future Defendant answered I dont think I can your Honor The Judge then sentenced Galbraith to serve a term of six months in the Penitentiary Pen-itentiary and to pay a fine of 300 and costs of prosecution and to stand committed com-mitted until the fine and costs are paid THE CASE OF JOHN TATE Was next called but it was found that the principal witness for the prosecution was absent Mr Dickson therefore asked that the case be continued until the witness in question could be found This was objected to by the defense but the objection was overruled and the case was set for Thursday the 30th inst JAMES IIIGGINS The West Jordan cohab was then called and arraigned upon a quintruple indictment indict-ment charging him with unlawful cohab itation with Mehalie Higgins and Mary Foreman He waived the reading of the indictment and entered a plea of not guilty Twelve jurors were then called Joseph Foreman Thomas Davis and E M By nun were challenged peremptorily and their places being filled by others the jury stood as follows George Shell JM Harvey Boman Cannon William McCrea R W Crane Wells Clark Joseph Foster Charles Shields to Edward Berry Frank McLaughlin I L Osborne M Dusseldorf The prosecution called its witnesses i and the examination was begun Mary foreman was the first witness sworn She said I know the defendant have known him thirteen years was married to him thirteen years ago have lived at West Jordan since September 1st 1883 know Mehalie Higgins she has lived at West Jordan since September 1883 her house is just a few feet from mine we lived in the same house only for a week or two after my marriage Higgins went away last January and returned just before be-fore he was arrested dont know where he had been he and I separated over four years ago it was an absolute separation separa-tion he has not stopped at my house since before we separated he lived from one to two days a week with me did not testify before the Grand Jury that he had continued to do so up to within a year 1 have supported mjseit by dressmaking we separated on account of the law my husband has been in the house since the separation has never stopped all night with me since that time have taken meals with him in the other house the other wife visits me and I visit her have met my husband at the other house have spent a part of the evening there did not see him there as a general thing we do not recognize each other as husband and wife he has been in my house during dur-ing the last three years I have been sick part of the time and he came to see me have no recollection of having been sick last year or the year before cant say whether or not my husband was at my house during 1883 dont think he was there during 1884 or 1885 cant say he was not there in 1885 cant say he was not there half a dozen times dont think he was there several times during 1885 Mr Dickson Dont you know that your husband has been in your house within the past three years when you were not sick After vigorous requestioning by the prosecutor and an order to answer from the Court the witness finally answered yes Mr Dickson Do you say that there has been a period of two months during the past three years in which your hus band has not visited you when you vere not sick Witness I dont remember whether it was two or three or four Mr Dickson Will you swear that you have not sustained the relation of wife to your husband at any time during the past three years Witness Yes Excused William Dowden was sworn and said I know Mary Foreman know his other wife I go to the house see Higgins there have been in Marys house quite often Mr Dickson Did you ever see Higgins at Marys house Witness dont know I Mr DicksonWell what is your best I recollection about it Witness My recollection haint nothin i on a thing of that kind I cant tell no I nearer ner I can I Mr DicksonIsnt it your best recollection recol-lection that you met him during the year 1884 at Marys house WitnessNo I dont know as I has I Excused Deputy Marshal Smith was then sworn = and testified as follows Served the warrant war-rant of arrest upon defendant first saw him in his hayfield as we were driving down the road he saw us approaching he left his work and we saw him walking walk-ing away from the wagon drove past the field entered the next field when I was about 100 yards from him he raised up to see where we were and it was in that way I found him took him to the house the two houses in question are under the same roof To the defense There is about two feet between the two houses the doors of the two kitchens are opposite and the space between them is roofed over Excused Ex-cused Here the prosecution rested and the defense opened by calling James Winchester Win-chester who said When the new part was built the alley way was covered over at about the same time dont know whether the roof over the alley way is the same height as that of the houses or not there cant be muchdifference Mr Dickson then asked permission to reopen the case and take the witness as his own This was objected to by the defense but the Court overruled the objection and granted the request Witness then testified as follows to the I prosecution Have been acquainted with defendant several years have known the wives for years was in the house last fall met Higgins and the two wives therein there-in the same room Excused Mr Dickson then stated that it had been agreed to submit the case without argument and moved to dismiss the last count on the ground that it had been shown that the defendant was not at home during the time covered by that count The Court dismissed the said count and after charging the jury briefly he ordered that body to retire A recess was then taken until 2 p in HIGGINS GUILTY After being out about 10 minutes the jury returned a verdict of guilty on the first four counts Thursday the 30th instant in-stant was set as the day for sentence |