Salt Lake evening Democrat. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1885-1887, 1886-09-22
AND STILL THEY COME.
William w. Galbraith rs u COnstruc-
tiOnist-His ideas Of the
Edmund's Law.
The Five Count Case Against John Tate
Continued Until the Both
Instant.
James Higgins Tried on Quintruple
Indictment-0ne Count
Dismissed.

! ence OF unwilling witnesses with their
evasive answers. "a sufficient number OF
revolutions were made to turn on two
"martyrs" before the noon recess was
taken.
The first case called was that against
WILLIAM W. GALBRAITH,
Indicted on one count of unlawful cohab-
itation.
The defendant was arraigned and en-
tered the plea of guilty. He said that
he would waive the statuary privilege of
taking two days for sentence and was
ready for the judgment now.
The Court then asked what were the
intentions of the defendant as to the
future.
The defendant replied that he was a
member of the Church of Jesus Christ OF
Latter-day Saints, and as such he did not
think that he could promise He said
that he had tried to obey the law in the
past, and had made his particular
home" with but one of his wives. He
stated that he had, when the Edmunds
law was first passed, taken unto himself
his third wife, Emma Bodily, and lived
with her exclusively. Then, when it was
decided in the Snow case that man
must live with his first wife, he
CALLED A FAMILY COUNCIL,
And it was then agreed that he should
live with his first wife, and he had done
so ever since.
Mr.. Dickson then asked defendant if it
were not true that the second wife,
Emma Flint, had child two months
old.
To this the witness answered yes, and
in explanation said that the construction
he put upon the Edmunds law was that
it referred simply to mans living and
residing with more than one woman and
had no reference whatever to sexual in
tercourse. He said he had that under
standing of the law within himself"
and he couldn't get rid of the idea.
The Court differed from this view and
asked defendant whether or not he would
promise to obey the law in the future.
Defendant answered, 81 don't think l
can, your Honor"
The Judge then sentenced Galbraith
to serve term OF six months in the Pen
itentiary and to pay fine of $500 and
costs OF prosecution, and to stand COM
mitted until the fine and costs are paid.
THE CASE OF JOHN TATE
Was next called, but it was found that
the principal witness for the prosecution
was absent.
Mr.. Dickson, therefore, asked that the
case be continued until the witness in
question could be found
This was objected to by the defense,
but the objection was overruled, and the
case was set for Thursday, the 30th inst.
JAMES HIGGINS,
The West Jordan cohab., was then called
and arraigned upon a quintruple indict
ment, charging him with unlawful cohab
itation with Mehale Higgins and Mary
Foreman. He waived the reading of the
indictment and entered plea OF not
guilty.
Twelve jurors were then called. Joseph
Foreman, Thomas Davis and E. M. By
non were challenged peremptorily, and
their places being filled by others, the
jury stood as follows:
George She'll j. Nj. Harvey,
Boman Cannon, William McCrea,
II. w. Crane, Wells Clark,
Joseph Foster Charles Shields,
Edward Berry, Frank Mclaughlin,
l. Il. Osborne, M. Dusseldorf.
The prosecution called its witnesses
and the examination was begun. Mary
Foreman was the first witness sworn
She said: | know the defendant; have
known him thirteen years; was married
to him thirteen years ago; have lived at
West Jordan since September LIST, 1888
know Mehalie Higgins; she has lived at
West Jordan since September, 1888; her
house is just a few feet from mine; we
lived in the same house only for a week
or two after my marriage; Higgins went
away last January, and returned just be-
fore he was arrested; don't know where
he had been; he and separated over
four years ago it was an absolute separa-
ton; he has not stopped at my house
since; before we separated he lived from
one to two days week with me did not
testify before the Grand Jury that he had |
continued to do so up to within year;
have supported myself by dressmaking;
we separated on account of the law; my
husband has been in the house since the |
has never stopped all night |
with me since that time; have taken |
meals with him in the other house the |
other wife visits me and visit her; have |
met my husband at the other house have |
spent part of the evening there; did !
not see him there as a general thing; we
10 not recognize each other as husband
and wife he has been in my house dur
ng the last three years; | have been sick
part of the time and he came to see me
nave no recollection of having been sick
asst year or the year before; can't say
whether or not my husband was at my
house during 1888; don't think he was
here during 1884 or 1885; can't say he
vas not there in 1885 can't say he was
lot there half dozen times don't think
he was there several times during 1885,
Mr.. Dickson: Don't you know that
your husband has been in your house
within the past three years when you
we're not sick?
After vigorous re-questioning by the
and an order to answer from
he Court, the witness finally answered,
yes"
Mr.. Dickson: Do you say that there
las been a period OF two months during
he past three years in which your hus-
Dand has not visited you when you were
not sick?
Witness: don't remember whether it
vas two or three or four.
Mr.. Dickson: Will you swear that you
nave not sustained the relation OF wife to
your husband at any time during the
past three years?
Witness: Yes. Excused.
William Dowden was sworn, and said
know Mary Foreman; know his other
wife / Crn 10 tba bonoa. oaa IJ;,,,,;,r,