The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1881-04-05
A DEADENER
-, 'Et..{ F., iS.T
TO ALL LEGAL MEASURES TO SUE.
PRESS POLYGAMY IN UTAH.
UnIted States Supreme Court Decides
That There h Virtually No Way TO
Prove the Crime Of BIgAmy In
A0FmOndOm EUndsr Exist
Ing RultS Of Evidence,

WASHINGTON, D. O., April 4.-A decision
Wal rendered by the Supreme Court ol
the Uniteds States to-day in the Mormon
case Of John Miles against the United
States, brought here by an appeal from
the Supreme Court Of Utah. Miles was
indicted for bigamy in the Third District
Court OF Utah at Salt Lake City. A trial
was had and the jury rendered q verdict
OF guilty. Miles thereupon appealed to
the Supreme Court Of the territory, where
the judgment oil the District Court was
affirmed. He now appeals to this court
upon the following assignments Of error:
First-That Rdherents OF Mormon faith
were unlawfully excluded from the Jury.
Second-That the declarations oil N lies
were admitted as proof of his first marriage.
Third-That the testimony Of bis al.
legged second vile was admitted to prove
the marriage OF Miles TO wife No. |,
z The eonclusiots Of thiA court are: r.
Firat- Il 10 evident from the examins.
hon OF the persons and jurors on. their
toir dire that they believed polygamy was
ordained Of God and that the practice OF
polygamy was In obedience 10 the will OF
God, Under the common law this would
have been ground for the principal chal.
lenge OF jurors OF the same faith. It
needs no argument TO show that Jury
composed OF men entertaining such be.
lief could not have been free from bias or
prejudice on trial for bigamy OF a person
who entertained the same belief, and
whose otfense consisted OF the act Of liv.
ing In polygamy. But whether the. .evl.
denCe OF bias was sufficient or not, 1t was
so found by the trial, and that was Conclu.
sive.
seCond-That the District Court com,
mitted no error In admitting the declara.
tion OF Miles to prove bis first marriage,
,Third4That tho Court balov did err In
allowing Caroline Q wenS, thesecond vile,
TO give evidence against Miles touching
bis marriage with Emily Spencer, the
frat wife.
The law OF Utah declares the husband
shall not be q witness for or against his
vile, or the vile for or against her husband.
The marriage Of Miles with Caroline
Ovens was charged in the indictment and
admitted by him on the trial. The fact OF
bis previous marriage with Emily Spencer
was Wherefore the only issue 10 the case, and
that was contested to the end OF the trial
until the fact Of the marriage OF Emily
Spencer with Miles was established. Oar.
oline Ovens was prima faCie his wife, and
she could not be used as q witness against
him. Nearly oil the authorities agree
thatBo long as the fact Of the frat marriage
10 contested the second wife cannot be
admitted to proveit. It is made clear by
therecord that polygamous marriages are
30 celebrated In Utah aB 10 make proof OF
polygamy very difficult. They are con.
Quoted In secret, and persons by whom
they are solemnized are under such obli.
cations OF secrecy that II is almost impos.
sible, to- extract facts from them, when
placed on the witness stand. II both
wives are excluded from testimony Of the
first marriage as In the opinion Of this
Court they should be, under existing
rules Of evidence, the testimony sufficient
to convict Tor polygamy 10 Utah is hardly
attainable. This 10 not, however, a con.
sideration which ought to influence this
Court. Il must administer the laW,as II finds
II. The remedy is with Congress by en-.
acting such ChangeBin the law OF evidence
In Utah Rs 10 make both wives witnesses
In indictments for bigany. Fort error
In the above Indictment the judgment OF
the Supreme Court OF Utah is reversed,
and the cause remanded for a new trial,
Justice Woods delivered the opinion. /
= o. ..N y. H %