Arizona republican., 1890-05-25
BERNARD'S SIN. Sensational Trial in the District Court. What Was Seen by a Tempe
 Butcher. Were Harry Bernard and Sylveria Zunica Married2- 2-"I Am Only
 Her Sister,"

Harry Bernard seems to have been we'll, indiscreet-in the presence of his butcher.
 The District Court room was crowded yesterday at the trial of Harry Bernard and Sylveria Zunica for unlawful cohab- itation, the case being called immedi- ately upon the submission without argu- ment of the asylum cases.
 By far the greater portion of the day was consumed in getting a jury, and after the panel had been exhausted and a new one called for Messrs. B. Hey man, w. II. Pierce, George Wilder, A. K. Hitchcock, c. Ryan, George Boards ley J. L. Ward, D. Kile, George Aiken, M. Block, R. M. Bond and R. Coble were finally secured to try the cases.
 John Agard the first witness called for the prosecution said that he was famil- far with the City of Paris store. There was only one room besides the store- room in the building partioned off from the store, and in this room the defen- dunts ate and lived. They had bed in the room.
 Vim. Zent had known the defendants at Tempe, where he had supplied them with meat. He was butcher. He did not know Sylveria Zunica, but the female defendant he knew as Mrs. Der nard At Tempe the couple had lived in an adobe close to the store. The woman lived at the house. On one occasion, when he came with meat early in the morning, he had seen her getting out of Bernard's bed. Might have seen her do it more than one, but did not think so. On another occasion he had seen her sitting on the bed. This was just at daybreak. She was in her night clothes and Bernard was lying in bed at the time.
 This witness was not shaken by cross examination.
 Hi. Mcdonald testified that the de- fendants had lived together in the room back of the City of Paris store. Der nard had told witness that he was a married man.
 Edwin P. Rogeanuff, clerk in the City of Paris store, related the construc- tion of the interior of the building. He knew the defendants. They slept in the room in the rear of the store. At least witness thought they did. He had seen them coming out of there in the mOrn- ing. He had never seen them going in there. The lady usually rose early, the gentleman remaining in the room much later in the morning. He did not know positively that Bernard was asleep in the room. He had never seen him sleeping there. Miss Zunica's sister and some children had occupied the same room with the people great part of the time.
 "NO," witness said, in answer to a question from the court, "he had never heard Bernard in there of a morning."
 Attorney Rouse, at this point object ed to witness testimony on the ground that it was incompetent, irrelevant and immaterial.
 The Court could not see the force of the objection, and Mir. Rouse then argued that the indictment was defec- tive.
 The objection was overruled, and on cross-examination witness said that the defendants had never told him the na- ture of the relations subsisting between them. The young lady and the children had also occupied the room at the same time with defendants. They were all in there together. Suppose they all slept together. Witness slept in front part of store. Miss Zunica was sister. Miss Gertrude Zunica, petite, pert brunette, was the next witness. "The defendant, Sylveria Zunica, is not married now" witness said. ''She had been married twice, and twice widowed. Her first marriage had taken place when she was fourteen years old, and her second hus- band had died five years ago."
 ''Is the defendant, Sylveria Zunica, anything to you"
 Nothing much. am only her sister"
 Witness was excused without cross examination.
 E. J. Edwards, the next witness, testi- fled that during an examination on an attachment suit in justices court Der nard had told him that he was a single man. On cross examination witness said that he was not friendly to Bernard. He did not like him at all
 At this point court adjourned until Monday morning.