Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1881-04-05
THE RAMPANT RADICALS
RESOLVE TO RENEW THE RACKET.
They will ProIOng the Deadlock for the
Present-Garfeld's Wishes Unheeded
An Important Supreme Court
Decision Concerning
Polygamy.
CHIT-CHAT FROM THE NATIONAL
CAPITAL.
WASHINGTON.

Prices Cffer-Suprems Court Decision
IN Polygamy Case-Appointments
WAsHISGroS, April 4.-The position
OF Commissioner Of Indian Affairs has
been rendered ex Congressman Price OF
Iowa.
A decision was rendered by the L. ).
Supreme Court to-day in the Mormon
case OF John Miles against the United
States, brought here by appeal from the
Supreme Court of Utah. Miles was in
dicted for bigamy in the Third District
Court of Utah at Salt Lake City. The
trial was had, and the jury rendered a
verdict Of guilty. Miles thereupon ap-
pealed to the Supreme Court OF the
Territory, where the Judgment OF the
District Court was affirmed. He ap-
peals TO this court upon the follow
ing assignments OF error: First-That
adherents OF the Mormon faith were
unlawfully excluded from the jury;
second, that the declarations OF Miles
were admitted rs proof OF his first mar
riaye, and third, that the testimony
alleged that the second wife was admit
ted TO prove the marriage OF Niles TO
wife No. |. The conclusions OF this Court
are:
/. Its evident from the examination
of the Jurors on their rOr DIRE that they
believed polygamy was ordained OF God,
aud that the practice OF polygamy was
obedience to the will OF God. Accord
ing to all common law, tins wOuld have
been the ground for the principal chal-
lenge of jurors of the same faith. Ii
needs no argument to show that Jury
composed OF men entertaining such be-
lief could not be free from bias or preju-
dice on trial for bigamy of a person
who entertained the same belief, and
whose offense consisted OF the act
OF living in polygamy, whether the evil
dence of bias was sufficient or not II was
so found by trial and that was conclu-
sive.
>. That the district court committed
no error in admitting the declarations OF
MHes to prove his first marriage.
3. That the court below did err IN
allowing Caroline Owens, second vile, TO
give evidence against Miles, touching his
marriage with Emily Speacer, first wife.
The law of Utah declares that the hns'
band shall not be Sitness for or against
his wife, or wife for or against her hus-
band. The marriage Of Miles with Car
oline Owens was charged in the
indictment and admitted by
hun, on trial, the fact of his
previous marriage with Emily Spencer,
was therefore the only issue in the case,
and that was contested TO the end of the
trial until the fact Of the marriage Of
Emily Spencer with Miles was estab-
lished. Caroline Owens was primd
fIcis his wife, and she could not be used
asia witness against him. Nearly all the
authorities agree that ~ long as the Tact
of the first marriage is contested, the
second wife cannot be admitted TO prove
il. Ii is made clear by the
record that polygsmous marriages are
so celebrated in Utah, as to
make the proof OF polygamy difficult:
They are conducted in secret, and
the persons by whom they are sol
emnized are under such obligations oil
secrecy that il is almost impossible to
extract the facts from them when plac-
ell on the witness stand. IL both wives
are excluded from the testimony Oi the
first marriage, as IN the opinion Of this
court thew should be, under the exist
ing rules the evidence and testimony is
sufficient to convict, for polygsmy in
Utah is hardly attainable. This
is not, however, consideration
which ought to influence this court. 1t
must administer the law as it finds 1t.
Tue remedy is with Congress, by enact
ing such change in the law on evidence
in Utah as to make Doth wives witnesses
i'm indictments for bigamy. For error in
the above indicted, judgment OF the
Supreme Court Of Utah is reversed, and
case remanded for new trial. Justice
Woods delivered the opinion.
The President will send to the Senate
tomorrow a number of pOstoilice nomi-
nations, but will withhold the important
appointInents determined on.