Salt Lake evening Democrat. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1885-1887, 1886-10-02
THE ARNOLD TRIAL.
The Conclusion of the Evidence for the
PrOsecutiOn-The Defense
Introduce Evidence.
They Attempt to Show that the Visits
of Defendant We're on Account
of Sickness.
The Arguments Of Mr.. Dickson and
Mr.. Rawlins-The Defendant
Much Affected.

yesterday afternoon, the examination oil
witnesses in the Arnold case was proceed
ed with, and some important evidence
was elected.
The first witness after Orson Jr. had
had his say, was
FANNY ID. LINNELL,
The second wife OF the defendant. She
said: Was married TO defendant fourteen
years ago; has lived in this city with her
children since the 10th of May, 1885 !;
defendant has called to see the children,
sometimes as often as once day, and
always as often as once week when in
the city. She could not say when it was
he went away; whether it was before or
after the holidays of the present year
lie did not tell her where or when he was
going; he had returned and visited her
at her house before she was last before
the Grand Jury before January LIST he
had taken meals with her and the chill
dren; that was after May /, 1885. She
had during the period covered by the in
dictment visited Ogden with him and
one OF her children, putting up at the
Broom Hotel. Her supper was sent up
and she went down to breakfast; he
again after; he also went in the morn
ing; he did not sit down on either oc-
casion, nor did he occupy the room with
her; was out driving with her in the city
when the baby was sick last summer;
could not say. how many times, perhaps
half dozen times; could not remember
when she last went driving with him
but not since the babe was sick; when
he visited her at her home he generally
went in at the back door; witness has
not been to the theatre with him; he
never took her there, but he had taken
| her home from the the theatre defend
ant had been at her house in the even
| ing when she had sickness in the family
that was about the latter part of last
January; never was there on any other
occasion in the evening.
On cross-examination she stated that
since he pleaded to an Indictment in
April, 1885, he had not claimed her as a
wife, nor since that time had he treated
her as Il wife, as he did prior to that
time; he stopped with her one night, it
being the occasion of the sickness of the
babe. She has four children, the young
est years and half old defendant
supports the children; witness has to
rustic for herself. When he calls, it is
generally in the day time, but his visits
are irregular and uncertain as to time
the riding out with him was in the even
ing before dark, and on the advice of
physician for the benefit of the sick child
The occasions of his having taken meals
there was when witness invited him to
| do so; he sat up all night with the sick
child, and that was the only occasion of
his stopping at her house over night; he
nj uTitn nd hn,. gtCtn
the theatre once last winter; when call
ing he had asked for the welfare of the
children, not for hers, or had been on
business in connection with the manage
ment OF the children; there has been no
visiting between the two females since he
promised to obey the law.
MISS ARNOLD,
The daughter of the defendant, testified
to her fathers having lived with her
mother during all the time named in the
indictment.
MISS GARDENER,
A neighbor of Fanny's, testified to having
seen Arnold go to her house very often
during the time in question. He always
went in by the back door and came out
the same way.
JOHN TYLER,
Clerk at tine Broom Hotel in Ogden, said
that Arnold had registered at the house
twice during May, 1885. He had woman
with him the first time, and taking orc
room he registered 80. p. Arnold and
wife" The second time he had another
woman with him and, taking two rooms
which were joined by a door, he regis
tered simply, go. p. Arnold"
DEPUTY FRANKS
Testified to having seen Arnold 90 to
Fanny's house twice during January of
this year. Once was on the 18th and once
on the 18th.
At this point the prosecution rested
and the court adjourned until this morn
ing.
To-DAY's SESSION
AT the opening OF court this morning
the defense in the case began by calling
Deputy Franks, who said:
To defense: On the evening of the 18th
OF January, when | saw Mr.. Arnold leave
the house on First West street and 90 to
the Continental, | saw him go into the
bar-room he then went to the telephone,
and heard him mention DR.. Benedict's
name; the house was lighted when he
returned; he entered through the front
door; on the 18th, when | saw him 90
there, the house was lighted; he entered
the front door.
DIR. II. j. RICHARDS
Was then called. He said: Am ac-
quainted with defendant; was called to
treat child of his about the 10Th of
June, 1885; the child was very i'll; adj
vised them to keep the child outdoors as
much as possible.
To prosecution: l left the city two days
after | was first called there; don't know
anything about it except during that
time.
JIM JACK
Was the next witness. lie said: / am
acquitted with defendant; we have had
our Office together for eight or ten years
he usually gets there between and s !
O'Clock in the morning. Excused
FANNIE LINNELL
Was then called: | had sickness in my
family in January last; DR.. Benedict |
came there with Mr.. Arnold; one child |
was sick, and when it got almost well |
another was taken; think il was the lat |
Ter part OF January.
To prosecution-Dr. Benedict is the
family physician; he was there once |
at night while the child was sick he |
came several times in the daytime. Ex-
cused
II. q. MMILLAN
Was the next witness: | remember the
occurrence of Mr.. Arnold's pleading
guilty to an indictment for unlawful CO.
habitatiOn