Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1881-04-05
PCfyyap.v nm Teal

IHs 'NlTsp SrArSS SCFRSNE CeURT pECIpEs
EXISTING LAWS ~ BIZ psFycrtYE
decision was rendered by THE supreme
oout OF the Uniiei 5 .ates yesterday In the Nor
mon case OF John Miles agt. the tinted states .
b.ougnt here by appeal from the sunrep court
q ian. hiies Was indicted foe nlgsIny IN m,
.',1 .!sli.Os court OF tah. 81 salt Lake CITY
Ulal was had ard the Jury rendered . yef
DICT or guilty. Miles theTennon snnSsf.. -,
the supreme CO ur OF the territory wha-e I've
Judgment Of the district court was arf-med
Ee low appeals 20 thls court upon tn Q Ioilox.
ing assignments or error: First. That adne
rents OF the Mormon faitn were unla wfully ex-
clUded fTom the Jury. Second. That the decis-
1atlOnS or Niles were admitted as PROOF or hts
nTst marriage. Third. That the testimony OF
TIE alleged second wife was admitted 10 prove
the marriage OF Miles 10 wife No. l.
The conclusions 10 this court are: First that
II is evident from the examination OF che jurors
CT Their nOF ar that they believed that p0lyg-
AIRY vas ordsiDed OF GOD. and mat the praCJlce
CT pol! gamy was obedien ce TO the viii OF God
Al common law this would have been ground
hf principal challenge OF jurors OF the same
latin. IL needs no argument 10 show that a
Jury composed OF men entertaining such belief
Couu nol nave neen Tree from bias or prejudice
ohtoe tfiat for blgamy Of a person who enter
tanned the same belief. ana whose OF cuca con-
slS'td on me ecs or living IL polyElmY. Bls
whether The evidence OF bias was Suf7,ciau'
not IL was SO found by the IrierS. ana tbar VA
conclusive. Second, that the District Cour
committed DO error IN admitting the declara
uenS OF Miles 60 prove his nrSt marriage.
Third. that the court below did err In allow
Ing Caroline owens. the second WIFE to give
evidence against Miles touching his marriage
with Emily Spencer, the rrst wife. The law OF
ltah declares that a husband shall not % a
witness Tor or against his wife, or a wife for or
agatns, her husband. TAe marriage OF Miles,
with Caroline owens was charged I'm the In
dictment, and admitted by him upon the trial.
me TACT or bis previous marriage with Emily
spencer was, therefore. the only issue IN Ine
case, ana that was contested TO the end or thu
Ulai. ntll The TACT or the marriage or Emily
81 encGr with Miles was established CarOline
owens was prima racle ais wife, ana she could
not De usec as 4 witness against him. Nearly
all the authorities agree thai as long as the
tact OF The Inst marriage Is contested. the sec
ord wife canIot De admitted 10 prove H. IL Il
maze clear by the record that polyCamouS
marriages are so celebrated In Utah as u make
The proof OF pClygamy very cinirulL They
are conducted IN secret. and the persons by
whom they are solemniZed ara under such OBJ
legations Of secresy that Il Is alnlosJ tmposSlela
10 extract the facts from them when placed
upon the witness stand. IL both wives are ex-
cluded from testfyfng to the rrst marriage
as IN The opinion or this court they SHOULD o.
under the existing rules OF evidence testimony
SUFFICIENT 10 convict for pOls gamy In IJal Is
hardly attalnable. This IL not. however a con
SlceraJion which ought 10 influence this court.
IL must administer the law as Il inlS it. The
rrmeoy Is with Congress by enaCtiug such a
change in the law OF evidence In Utah "a 10
make both wives witnesses on Indictments for
hisamy. For the error above iudCAyed the
judgment OF the supreme court or IJah Is re-
yeIse0, ara the cause remanded for a new trial
Justice hccds delivered The opinion.