The Fairmont West Virginian. (Fairmont, W. Va.) 1904-1914, 1904-04-23
|yIARRIllEI
TWO WIVES WI - y g N E8c EREMo q
NY DID ANGUS M. SchNfl 2 2 y ,SSs5s
a NORM in. ~; 2ssS'zzsg
HAS. HALF a DOZEN FAM1LIE s8#Iris
SALT. LAkE&csTY II 4. + EE19S555s;
SENT5TIEaE.

HAS HALF a DOZEN FARiiLIEsSsI ~ s NJ
| SALT LAKE CITY a T 7. = s:
aREsENT I'M E.
The feature of yesterdays hearing
in the smoot case was the tea mons
Of Angus NJ. Cannon The stimonysg
| was personal in character deall la ~
with the corvict!on5 of the wit ess cTlssse
the charge OF co-hab itatio q 7 e vas
drag scd from hin, under protest " 9 tSsS
he was in peril of liahility to pspsee1i-gs@
ton for What he. reveal eti.s en- 2 So
sured his plura! marriages underline rs
statute OF Limitations. could SSt1ot5s&aes55ss
used as evidence against him he an
sweret1 most OF the questions 4ask ed
| The same t,antin ess was not apparenI@%5
when the witness was pressed To- rt--sss
veal the nature OF the oat,tz IleE had
taken in the endowment house. SeS55
other witnesses he declared the$Ssas5
| 1reGness of that oath prevented him
from proclaimins it to the world.s85
The sensation OF the hearins was
when Taylor examined Cannon ~ res
Sald to his various MARRIAGES ~ e.:
Taylor asked the witness when he
first married and he answered rs 2 s.
July Is. 1sss.
TO whom ?"
Sarah Martha Mou%ele.y.s 5ss
WHO NEXT
Cannon, his voice si1a akin q with
| great emotion. said: u. =
For q long time / have lived within
The law as far as IT. was possible sSSss44$
I5.fo so IN the face of ablI.ationsss3{s55:sf
my families | nave not p:.raded ms
| Families. but III homes pride have
luourisked them. The pres, 81 of the
country caricatured President Smith
for the testimony he gave in regard st
70 plural families and iE am asked
to make similar exhibitions 1 ~ ia M ls-
lies appeal tor protect,n:s from an ~
consequences shat MAJ be the 6
OF my testimony. Will a'.s-ver$a rs
questions in regard TO 11lysci Or ne
church If I am assured I Will not4b be-
placed in peril by reitson Of that# tes-s==
| tlmony SssSsSEEsai
Taylor observed that he did no de.
sire answers to any questions WI lcfls8sS
related to marriages not fully exempt
ed from prosecution under the statute
| or limitations and on that statement
| Chairman Burrows directed tina the
question concerning the second mar
sisnse OF Cannon should be answered.
Then the question ITO whom were
you est married 2" was put.
ANNA Amanda Mouseley. 80 4si:s35
when were you married to here
asked Mr.. Taylor.
sat the same hour that was mar
ried to Sarah Martha Mouse1ey. '53ss
.By the same ceremony
Yes
.,ro whom were you next narrie ~. ~
was asked.
Cannon answered . M rs Clara
! son, in 81
He also said that he vas married to-
Martha hughes in 1884, Maria Ban
| MON in 1886: Johanna c.. Donnelson
in 1886. and that he had not been
/ married since that time. All his wives
are living. When asked to describe
the rcside fences of his various wives he
said they all lived In Salt Lake co1lnSS
| ty, but in separate houses. and thatsS5
he had fan14-.es by five of his wives
DO you live with all yourSsNiF esssss
now" MFR Taylor asked
| "Whye Because you are nov IN VS.
them:'
NO; because of All agreement N ado
By the church which compelsSs ms to-
Re as modest as | can.
Chairman Burrows asked in regAri AS
to this agreement and the witness
| said he referred to the manifesto. Of
| 1890 declaring against con inI u "
! polygamous rehabilitation
what has been the effect tot hat
manifesto upon your asked Mt ay-5ss
! lor. :&5s
1T made me more modest and l IS
have only been attentive as felt
common humanity required me toSs3
be-
what do you mean by thai
Il mean that this church order mas Z;
made rae more cold in my treatme9n
of them than | should be. s$s@i
Chairman Burrows asked rnaIssSss$@
questions concerning the altitude Of
the witness toward the laws Of theSSs
land and the laws Of God. both. Of
which declared against polyganousH