The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1906-10-06
FATE DECIDED BY
A BISHOPS COURT
Rightful Claimant of Property
Is Turned Down by Agents
of Hierarchy.
YEARS OF SUFFERING,
DISAPPOINTMENT AT LAST
History of Case That Will Fur
nish Valuable Object
Lesson.

Here is plain statement of facts,
With no attempt at coloripg, which may
assist the rank and file of the Mormon
people to fair view of what they may
exnect. as individuals, when they be
come reduced hy sickness or nj for,
tune TO want and penury and are totceu
m take their troubles to the Bishops
for adjustment.
Frank Branting, who conducts gro
cerv store at 675 Fourth East street,
was an adopted son of his father hrst
wife. A second wife was taken by
Branfing, senior, shortly after TINS
adoption. The old man died sixteen
years ago, leaving the two wives ana
az odonted son of wife No. l. On
his death the first wife took charge OF
the property he had left, amounting IN
value to some $4,000. Since that time
this woman and her adopted son have
lived in luxury. while the second Wlfe
has toiled at the wash tub and done
other menial labor to keep body and
soul together,
Asked for Her Rights.
Two wears ago this second wife mar
ried a miner named John Hanford Al
most from the day of their marriage
he has been i'll and her worldly condl'
tiop has. therefore, been little better
than before she took husband. Six
weeks AFRO the first wife died. After
the funeral Mrs Uanford went to
Frank Branting and asked for some set
tlemept of her interest IN tho estate
She carried with her letter from her
first husband In which he assured her
that. no matter what happened, he
would leave A Will, the provisions of
which would make her comfortable for
Hfe. Mrs Hanford has not doubt
that this will was made and LETT with
the first wife and her adopted SON,
Frank Branting. The latter promised
Mrs. Hanford that he would give her
her Just dues, according TO the laws OF
the church However, as he made no
move in this direction, she called again
made a proposition to 60 with her be
fore two bishops of the church and
have them decide what she was en-
titled to out of her first husband s es-
tate. Not knowing what else TO do,
she agreed TO this and Bishop Z. lver-
son and Hyrum J, Jensen were selected
to hold court and decide as to- the rights
of this only surviving legal relative OF
the man who had been dead for sixteen
years.
Before the Bishops.
The trial was arranged for Tuesday
night, but, at the suggestion OF Bran
ting, was DELAYED until Thursday even
ing. when the Bishops court was duly
held at Iverson s residence, $40 East
Seventh South street. Branting and Mrs
Uanford made their statements TO the
two bishops and it took them but
minute TO hand down decision that
the poor old lady was not entitled to a
cent Of the money of her dead husband.
She was so disappointed and angry as
she saw her last hopes take flight that
she roundly denounced the whole crowd,
telling them that she, q faithful MEM
ber of the Mormon church, had never
received A favor in all the years of her
distress except from the Gentiles.
How Decision Was Reached.
II transpires that the main point up
on which the Bishops decided the case
before them was that Branting had OBJ
. ligated himself to the amount of S12,-
900 and was desirous of getting out of
debt When Mrs. Hanford protested
that she was in no way responsible for
the private debts of Branting, she was
told that Branting would pay his tith-
ing out of the money awarded him by
the Bishops, whereas. If any portion of
IL had been awarded to her, the church
would not get what is coming TO it from
its members.
The poor woman is living with her
sick husband, who, by the way, had
surgical operation performed less
than twenty-four hours ago. at the cor
ner of Seventh and G. Streets. They
are without means.