The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1889-10-29
BENNETT GOES FREE.
How Polygamists May Regain
Their Citizenship.
JUDGE POWERS PROPOSITION.
"once Pelygamist Always POlygamist" is
Knocked Out by tho Ruling of
Judge Zane.

The case of the People VS.. w. b. Bennett, oc
cupied the greater portion of the time OF judge
and jury in the Third district court yesterday.
Mr. Bennett will be remembered as the gen
tleman who was arrested last spring charged
with illegal registration in that he had sworn
that he was not polygamist.
Messrs Rawlins and Moyle appeared for the
defendant, and Messrs. Powers and Mckay
prosecuted.
JOHN z. BENNETT
was called Defendant is my brother. 1 know
Hannah Dowden, who is about sixty years OF
age. / do not know that she bears any relation
to our family, but have heard that she did.
Last May she lived just below Sandy, about two
and one-half miles south Of Sandy. l do not
know for sure that she is married to my
father. have heard that he has lived with her
as his wife. have heard him say he was mar
red to her This was about five or six years ago.
To Mr.. Rawlins-l live at home; lcame home
last March. Prior TO that time had not been at
home much for five years Whenever have
been at home father has lived there.
ELIZABETH HALL.
Tam married. Live at West Jordan. Know
The defendant. My mothers name is Hannah
Dowden. She lives at Sandy. Mother was a
plural wife OF the defendant up until about
year ago, when she got a divorce from him. She
was married to him in 1873. Previous to OBJ
tanning divorce, the defendant lived with my
To Mr.. Rawlins-Tbe divorce was procured in
What is the repute in your family as to
whether he has lived with her Us his wife since
obtaining divorcef"
PowerS-We object.
The Judge-He is asking for repute The
question may be answered.
Powers argued the matter with the court.
Whenever man had been apolygamist, there
was but one way in which he might again be
come voter-that was by amnesty OF the Presi-
No other him
Mr.. Rawlins begged TO differ. He thought it
was possible for man TO dissolve his illegal re-
lations. II was the height OF ab5urdity to say
Idat man could not stop doing wrong without
The consent of the President OF the United
States. The act against polygamy was created
10 stop the practice of polygamy. Under the
argument Of the counsel the law Furnishes man
for crime and at the same time forbids him
from disseminating the practice OF the crime.
Belief in polygamy was not made a crime
Powers called the attention OF the court to the
fact that the question now before ii was most
important one. II the position OF the defendant
was carried, 1900 polygamists could procure
church divorce register and vote, and the Ed
munds law would be farce The pardoning
power Of the President was the only way back
10 citizenship in such cases as this.
RawlinS-SuppOSe Judge Powers, man had
married a second wife, lived with her year
and she had then left him and married another
man. Would he be a bigamist polygamist
Aowers-Yes.
( Rawlings-Suppose that she had died, would
lle be polygamist then:
Mowers with vehemence) Yes. The act
ri marriages is what constitutes the offense. l
DO not care whether a plural wife obtains a
divorce, whether she dies or whether her hus-
band keeps her out of the house, he is still q
bigamist.
Judge Zane, in reviewing the proposition of
Judge Powers said that the question is, what is
the meaning Of the term polygamist as used in
the statute, and what is necessary to terminate
that relationships In 4 general sense a man Is
apOlygamist who practices poygamy, or main
tainS that II Is right; but that Is probably too
general definition for this statute. In the case
OF Murphy VS.. Ramsey, the United States su-
preme court said the law did not apply to those
who went into polygamy before there was a law
against il, but to those who were actually in the
relationship; a man must actually have a
plurality OF wives TO be polygamist. The fact
of Capitalization is not u feature in determining
the meaning of the term. a man ceases to be a
polygamiSt when he fully and finally terminates
the relationship; the way to accomplish this is
not pointed out, so the question is, what is neceS
sary TO cause cessation Of the polygamouS re-
lstion? Can the relation exist where the parties
have not only ceased to cohabit, but have sep
arated in good faith? That is. does it exist be-
cause OF the former relationship! To maintain
a relationship requires some act Of the
mind to continue the condition - that
is, conSentlng to recognize more than
one woman as wife Does man recognize a
woman as his wife when she is not, and they
have separated in good faith? The supreme
court holds to the idea that there must be a
recognlton-that is, that man must recognize
say they separate and their conduct shows they
are acting in good faith, that it is effective
separation. The question as to good faith will
be for the jury to determine The section re-
garding amnesty or pardon does not seem TO
have any connection with this question. These
parties might obtain amnesty, and yet continue
the polygamous relation The evidence on that
point will be admitted. The question is whether
th$@9 parties have separated and in good faith
d SOLVED the relationship.
4 .. ELIZABETH HALL
was recalled and continued her testimony as fol
lows: 1t was generally understood that the de
PENDANT had separated from Hannah Dowden
some time in May, 1883. That they no longer
continued to recognize each other as husband
and wife That mother was no longer. Prior to
May, 1888, mother lived near to defendant. After
the separation, she went to live at Sandy, where
she is supported by her son. The defendant has |
not visited her since that time recognized |
her as his wife.
HANNAH DOWDEE.
My name is Hannah Dowden Know the de-
fenGant. His wife's name was Sarah Bennett. |
toek place in this city about ten |
years ago, and lived with him as his wife until |
about a year ago, when l obtained a church |
divorce. / applied for the divorce because | !
ckuld not get along with him very well The ap |
pifcation Tor the divorce was made TO the clerk
of West Jordan ward He consented to the dl-
vorcr. az course, because he signed the paper
The paper refer to reads as follows:
TRIPLICATE.
Knew all men by these presents-That we, Il
William b. Bennett and Hannah
\. Bennett, his wife, before her marriage TO him
Hannah Nash, do hereby mutually covenant,
promise and agree to dissolve all the relations
which have hitherto existed between us as hus-
band and wife, and to keep ourselves separ-
ate and apart from each other from this time
forth.
In witness whereof. we have hereunto set our
hands at west Jordan, Titan, this 4th day of
June, A. D.. 1885
w. B. BENNETT,
SARAH NASH BENNETT.
Signed in presence of
JOSEPH j. WILLIAMS,
MARY r. MILLS.
The separation was brought about at my own
SO etation and because defendant had failedto
support me.
To Mr.. Rawlins-I do not know that 1 ever
made complaint that he was not living with
me a wife. He came TO see me whenever he
could without being seen. There was no ar