Salt Lake evening Democrat. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1885-1887, 1885-07-17

over night once week, and no oftener
Ayes, sir.
Q.-Has he ever introduced you to an.
one as his wife?
A.-No, sir.
Q.-What about your child?
At is sixteen months old, and named
Barbara
Q.-Has your little child ever beer
blessed?
Ayes, sir. NV husband blessed it
Q.-Any record made of the blessing
A.-No, sir.
Q.-What name was your child blessed
under?
A.-Barbara Elizabeth.
Q.-Is that all-no family name?
A.-That was ALL
Mr.. Dickson dismissed the witness, and
claimed thatthe defendant should be held
for unlawful cohabitation.
Mr. patrick-Then there must be
new definition added for unlawful CO.
habitation. May it please the Court, l
would like to know if this term unlawful
cohabitation is so elastic as to permit of
being stretched and extended so as to
| take in new state of affairs from the
practice in all other such cases. The
crime, as defined in the Cannon-M usser
cases, must be proven by showing "hold-
ing out" and dwelling together as man
and wife
Mr.. Dickson: The law has given no
definition, and the Supreme Court did
not hold that in order to convict of I'M
lawful cohabitation a man must invari-
ably hold out more than one woman as
his wife when an actual, formal marriage
ceremony had been celebrated, as in this
case, and the defendant continues to live
with them, as shown by the evidence.
Mr.. Kirkpatrick: Just one word more
1t is one thing to show partnership and
another TO prove cohabitation.
Mr. Dckson-It is not the "holding
out" alone, but the actual living with
these women that demands the defendant
held for trial
Bonds were fixed in the sum of 81 800
for Mr.. Gowans to appear before the
Grand Jury at the next September term
Henry Monheim and Stephen S. Wor-
thington went sureties. The charge of
polygamy was withdrawn.
THE CASE OF JOHN BOWEN.
Mrs. Hannah Craner Bowen was called
to the stand to testify in the examination
under the charge against her husband of
cohabitation
Mr. Dickson.-What is your husbands
name?
A.-John Bowen.
Q.-When were you married.
An 1874.
Q.-Where do you live?
Ain Tooele City.
Q.-How many children have you?
Al have four.
Q.-Where is Eliza?
Al am not obliged to answer any
more questions.
Q.-Why do you decline to answer?
Al do not choose to answer all ques-
tons.
Here it was learned that the witness
vas the defendants legal wife, and she
vas excused.
lily ABETH CRANER, THE ALLEGED SECOND
WIFE,
Mas called to the stand.
Q.-Where do You live?
An Tooele city.
Q.-Do you know defendant?
Ayes, sir.
GLOW long have you known him?
Al have known him 20 years.
Q.-Where in Tooele do You live?
An the same house.
Q.-Are you married?
Ayes, sir.
Q.-When were you married?
A.-The 2Sth OF October, 1880.
GLOW many children have you?
Al have three. I
Q.-How old is the youngest?
A.-Three weeks old (Which she had '
18th her in the Courtroom). I
Dickson: The witness can go; don't |
ish to examine any of the others. G
Commissioner Mckay said that he L
ever understood that the Supreme
curt made it necessary 10 show f'hold- s
g out" to establish cases when the | d
her conclusive evidence was sufficient G
warrant
The defendant was held guilty, and re- c
llred to give bonds in the sum of 81, 800. a
hich were furnished. 2
In both cases the legal wives were re-
ased from giving bonds, while the other d
THESES were held in the amount of
90 each.