The Marlboro democrat. [volume] (Bennettsville, S.C.) 1882-1908, 1905-05-12
TWO DIVORCES
Figure in the Life OF Millard,
Charged With Bigamy.
HE NOW ADMITS THIS
In Written Statements Which He Made
Concerning His Previous hiatri.
monlal Ventures, and Which
Are Produced at PfeIim.
iuary by prosecuYOn.
mary by Prosecution.

Are Produced at PfeIim-
mary by ProsecufOn.
The preliminary hearing In the Cas-
Of Kenyon v. Millard, who was ar
rested April 81 charged with .igamy
and who has been confined in the
Orangeburg county Jail in default Of
$500 bail, was heard Thursday Morn
ing by Magistrate G. p. Brunsop, who
issued the warrant for his arreit.
The prosecution was represented by
Hon. It. M. Raysor, while Messsa.
Wolfe & Berry and Col. Thomas F.
Brantley appeared for the defendant.
1t had been understood that MAelard
would conduct his own defense, aid
it was learned that the counsel for
the defense had been retained by
friends OF Millard, who reside in an.
other State.
AS is usual with such cases, 1t at
tracted undue nOtOriety and MagiS-
trate Brunson's ttllce was packed to
suffOcation long before the time ap-
pointed for the hearing. In fact, the
room was SO crowded that there was
not room sufficient for those involved
In the case, and the attorneys were
forced to ask that the room be cleared
before they would take up the case.
Miss Kenyon, who recently married
Millard, was the only witness for the
State, and the occasion was very NOR
tifying to her; while Millard, who was
brought into court looking fresh and
in good spirits, sno"ed the effect OF
the Strain before an adjournment was
was reached.
In addition to Miss Kenyons testi.
mony, the State entered as evidence
three letters written by Millard 10
Miss Kenyon since his ircarce ration,
while the only evidence offered by
the defense were one telegram and
four letters received from Miss Ken.
yon since their separation, and also i
letter from the clerk OF the court OF
Osceola, Iowa, with reference to a di-
vOrce granted Louisa Millard in 1880.
This correspondence was SO volumi-
nous that no effort was made to reau
it at the time, but Magistrate Brun-
son will read it carefully and either
announce his decision at u later GATE
or fix another time for hearing tue
arguments by attorneys for both
sides. Meanwhile Millard has been
remandcd to jail pending the magjs
trate's decision in the matter.
\ The contention OF the attorneys for
the prosecution is that the interOcu-
tory divorce granted Mrs. Ada Millard
December 4, 1904, prevents either
party from marrying for one year
ffnr Il Il Id.
this TO be mere technicality, mas
much as Millard had not obtained a
copy OF the decree and was ignorant
of It's restrictions.
THE ONLY WITNESS.
Miss Sallie q. Kenyon, whose mar
riage to Mlllard has caused the trou.
Bile, was the only witness examined.
She was questioned by Mr. Weeks.
She testified as to her marriage to
Mil'ard on April 10, which was per
formed at Orangeburg by the Rev. G.
M. Lightfoot. She met MilIard on
April at her home in ST. George,
They were not engaged at that time.
The engagement was the result OF
several days association. Millard did
not tell her that he had been previous
ly married until after they had be-
come engaged to be married. He
stated to her that he had living wife
in California, from whom he had Sc
cured divorce years before, after
having lived with her only few
days. After his arrest he told her
more OF his married life. Stated that
he had five children by his California
wife, and gave as his reasons for not
telling her OF this previous TO their
marriage that he was afraid witness
would not marry him. He denied
that he had ever been married other
than to the California wife. Witness
has received three letters from de-
fendant since he was committed TO
jail and separated from her. These
were put in evidence.
On cross examination by Mr.. Wolfe
she explained the fact THAI his letters
to her were addressed to 'Rebekka,n -
while the letters she had written to
him at the jail were addressed to
Isaac" This was due to the sup
gestion Of Millard that their marriage
romance was akin to that OF Isaac and
Rebekka, and those names we're adopt.
ed by them for their correspondence
between themselves.
She had been informed by Millard
before they were married that lie had
been previously married In California,
but he stated that he had secured a
divorce. She stated that before they
were married, Millard had written 10
California to W. Fl. HaW, clerk OF
court, Humbolt county, Eureka, Cal,
asking for certified copy OF the de.
cree Of divorce aad so cents worth Of
stamps had been enclosed in the let
ter to cover the charges for the copy
OF decree. After the arrest OF the de-
fendant, e letter from Eureka had
come to st. Georges, which she had
opened under direction from defen
dant. 1t contained the copy OF de-
cree Of divorce. She had read it and
forwarded it TO defendant at Orange
burg. Several letters from witness to
defendant and telegram we're idcn-
titled and put in evidence.
The following letter was also placed
in evidence:
Osceola, Iowa, April 28, 1905.