Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1900-06-22
WHAT Is THE LAW?

There are two causes that have beer
carried up on appeal TO the suprem.
court Of the state. which possess pecu.
Mar features and are Of general Interest
They are the Graham and Robert.
cases. They are in some respects ech'
oes Of the old tumults, occasioned Boy Oh,
conflict between a portion OF Utah
people and the special laws enacted IN
compliance with popular demands. But
they bear a technical complexion which
ought 10 be judicially examined. that a
settlement may be made Of some per-
tinent questions.
In consequence Of relations formed
under past social customs, which can
not be altogether dissolved, there are q
number Of men and women In Utah who
have to face legal provisions that when
construed strictly according to former
rulings. leave them In apparent con-
hiot with State regulations which they
do not desire to combat, They want to
be IN harmony with the civil law, and
az the same time do no violence TO re-
ligious vows and convictions Of right,
nor 70 covenants and contracts which
10 them are sacred and eternal.
They. and many Just people who do
not agree with them as to matters Of
faith take the ground that the changed
conditions, which the whole community
recognizes and Of which judicial notice
may be properly taken, require changes
IN the old rulings suggested by the o'd
situation How Tar this can be consist
entity effected remains for the highest
court IN the State TO determine II Is
hoped that this win be carefully con-
sldered when these appealed cases come
up for adjudication
There is one point In both which some
lawyers look upon as important. and
which others do not seem TO regard as
Of any great consequence. To US 10 ap-
pears vital as a technical objection to
the complaint and indictment It cans
not be ridiculed out OF court nor made
less prominent by sarcasm, TechnIcali-
Ties are usually the very cause Of legal
disputes and reversals Of verdicts and
decisions That point is the charge that
the defendant, In each case. committed
the offense Of which he was convicted
In Salt Lake county, The evidence
showed to the contrary.
The facts ELECTED I'm the Roberts case
We're that the accused lived with law
ful wife In Davis county, and that he
had a plural wife In Salt Lake county
with whom he had associated 10 the exc
tent OF recognizing her as such, SO that
It was matter Of public repute The
legal offence is cohabitation with more
than one woman as wives But as we
have stated he was charged with COM
hitting this offence IN Salt Lake
county, and that was not proven but
the testimony showed otherwise.
Under our statutes, when an offence
Is committed partly In one county and
partly in another county. the jurisdic-
ton may be IN either OF those coun-
ties. But Is It an offence, or part VI
an offence, to live with a legal wife IN
any county? Is not that IN itself wholly
and perfectly LAWFUL Can a man Doe
legally charged with cohabitlng with
more than one woman IN salt Lake
county, when, even If the mere "hablt
and repute Of marriage is 10 be termed
rehabilitation It Is certain that this
only occurred with one woman in that
county?
Observe the complaint and lndict-
ment so we understand, do not ace
cuse the defendant OF committing the
alleged offence partly in one county
and partly in another, but charge b.m
with committing It In salt Lake county
This is mere technlcallty. Of course
But persons convicted of murder and
other great crimes have been released
on mere technlcaIties, and this question
is to be decided on principles Of law
not on prejudice.
Apart from this technical Issue. ODE
proper and consistent legal definition
Of the term unlawful cohabltation" s
OF Importance TO "a number Of Utahs