The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1885-10-18
The Little Discussion between
Judge and Defendant.
1.-THE MOTION is OyERRULED, -
And Mr.. Miner Takes Up His Tenn
pOrary Residence in the Utah
Penitentiary.

and w. d. Newsom, the Third District
Court room was filled to ~its utmost
capacity in anticipation, no doubt, of
something interesting.
Mr.. MINERS case was the first one
taken up.
JUDGE ZANE then asked Mr. Miner if
he was ready to proceed, when counsel
for the defense interposed motion for
a new trial on the ground that the YER
dict was contrary to the law and the
evidence, and that the court had erred
IN its instructions.
Mr.. MINER argued in support of the
motion, claiming that the evidence
showed that one of the women men
toned in the Indictment was not
named as there stated, and that the
Jury found a verdict contrary to the
instructions of the Court. He also
contended that the habit and repute of
marriage had not been proved.
Mr.. VARIAN argued in reference to
the difference of names, that the iden-
LITIGATION had been complete. The
verdict of the jury was conclusive that
they so considered it.
THE Court then ruled, with respect to
the name of the plural wife, there was
a conflict of evidence. The name in
the indictment is Annie Adams. The
mother of the second wife testified first
that the name was Elizabeth Ann, but
afterwards did not know whether it was
Elizabeth Ann or Ann Elizabeth-she
could not remember which; but after
wards on croSs-examlnatiOn made the
statement that she was called Annie
Adams, more commonly, in the family.
| am not clear that the name Annie is
not a name used for Ann, as Maggie
often is for Margaret. This kind of
termination to names is often used as
sounding more euphonious. l had
some doubts in giving the instruction
as 10 whether the name Annie was a
nickname for Ann, and took some
trouble to state to the jury, If you be-
lieve from the evidence, gentlemen of
the jury, that one of the women men,
toned in the indictment was named
Elizabeth Ann or Ann Elizabeth, and
that she was not called or known as
Annie or Annie Elizabeth, ..then you
should find the defendant not guilty.
l don't think the difference in the name
Ann or Anna is material. The name is
used to identify the person. We say a
house, church, dwelling, to describe a
place. The name describes a person,
and individual, so they can be picked
out, so the person can be known. Some
people use nicknameS, as Maggie for
Margaret-it means the same thing. So
think here some say Ann and some
Annie. l am of opinion there is suffi-
Gent evidence to cause the Jury TO
believe she was called in the family by
the name of Annie. People outside the
family get the names of family from
parents and brothers and sisters. One
witness confined the name to the family,
but another did not. The testimony,
all taken together, shows that she was
known as much as any by the name of
Annie. With respect to the Sufficiency
of the evidence, there was enough to
show that he lived with both women as
his wives. 1t was not shown that he
stayed all night, but he was there late
at night and early in the morning, and
men do not usually go around a house
late and early to convey an idea they
are married when they are not 1t is
the reasonable inference they were mar
ried. There was also a child, and it
bore his name. The witnesses were dis
posed to favor the defendant, truthfully,
as far as they could. The testimony
was conflicting, and some of them made
statements, but taken al
think the evidence is suffi-
cient. The motion is therefore over
ruled.
= Mr.. MINER then filed motion in
arrest of judgment, on the grounds,
there was no charge of pub
lie offense in the Indictment; 2d-That
the law was void, for uncertainty, He
argued in support of the motion, which
was Overruled.
The COURT then said, rather sharply
Have you anything further to say.
Mr.. Miner? Stand up.
Mr.. MINER arose to his feet.
THE CoURT-Mr. Miner have you any
thing further to say?
Mr.. MINER-No, think not, sir.
THE COURT-You will stand up, sir.
Are you prepared to say that you will
obey the laws of the United States in
the future-this law as interpreted by
the court-the law against polygamy
and unlawful cohabitation?
Mr.. MINER-If your honor please:
While am native born citizen of the
United States, since reaching my majo-
rity l have never said that l would
obey all the laws of the Congress of the
United States.
The COURT-Wen how is it you are
practising law? Does not your oath
require you TO do it? Let me have the
statutes of 1884.
Mr.. MINER was admitted before
that statute was passed.
THE CoURT-You have stated you
were assistant district attorney of the
United States2
Mr.. NINER-I was.
THE COURT suppose you took the
oath as such assistant.
Mr.. MINER-Yes, to support the Con-
stitution of the United States. But for
the last thirty-three years, since attain
ing my ma Ority, there have been some
of. the statutes of the United States
which l said publicly that would not
obey, and some that l would not, prob
ably, if hadlived when they occurred;
such as the alien and sedition laws;
coming up to the time when what was
known as the fugitive slave law was
passed; it required me, as an individual.
living in the Northern States, and every
other individual, to convert ourselves
into Niger catchers of the slaves OF the
South. When that law was passed
said that l would not obey i'll would
take the consequences of failing to obey
it-and a former practitioner with me
in Ohio was fined 81 900 and given six
months Imprisonment by the court OF
the Northern District OF Ohio, because
he would not obey it; There mad