Arrested for Polygamy
Mr. Dickson’s Mission not Dead but Sleeping
Mr. Parley P. Pratt, of the Eighteenth Ward, well-known to most people as poll-tax collector of Salt Lake City, was arrested by Captain Greenman, as he was stepping out of the post office yesterday, at about 3 o’clock. He was immediately taken before Commissioner McKay, where he waited until Mr. Dickson could be released from his duties in court, at 5 o’clock. At that hour, Mr. Dickson, Mr. Richards, representing the defendant, and the following witnesses were present: Mrs. E. Nowells, Parley P. Pratt, Jr., Susan Pulley, Brighamina Pratt, Dr. Romania Pratt and Mrs. Mary Ann Smith.
A brief conference took place between Messrs. Dickson and Richards, as to a suitable time for conducting the examination, as Mr. Dickson could only be present after 5 o’clock. Mr. Richards could not conveniently meet today. Mr. Dickson suggested that the examination be waived, as it would all have to be gone over on the 10th before the Grand Jury; Mr. Richards said he had had no opportunity to consult with Mr. Pratt yet, and he would prefer if the matter went over till Wednesday evening at 6, when he would decide definitely which course to pursue. An adjournment was therefore taken until tomorrow evening, Mr. Pratt being released on a $2,500 bonds, W.G. Phillips and Alma Pratt becoming his securities, the complaint against the accused is made by Marshal Ireland and reads as follows:
That prior to the first day of January, A.D., 1883, in the County of Salt Lake, the said Parley P. Pratt did marry and take to wife on Romania Doe, whose true surname is to the complainant unknown, and did then and there have her, the said Romania, for his lawful wife; that afterwards, to wit, on the first day of May, A.D., 1883, the said Romania Pratt being then alive, he, the said Parley P. Pratt did, at the said County of Salt Lake, marry and take to wife one Susan Pulley, and did thereby then and there commit the crime of polygamy; and said complainant on his oath aforesaid, does further complain that ever since, to wit, the first day of May, A.D., 1883, hitherto, the said Parley P. Pratt has, at said county of Salt Lake, continuously lived and cohabited with more than one woman namely with one Brighamina Pratt and with one Susan Pulley.
Dr. Romania Pratt, the first wife, has been divorced from P.P. Pratt, a number of years. Whether the charge of polygamy can be made out depends upon the testimony relating the other two women named.
[Journal History of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Mar. 2, 1885, 5]
[Salt Lake Herald, Mar. 3, 1885]
[transcribed and proofread by David Grow, May 2006]
********
P.P. Pratt Arrested
Charged with Polygamy and Unlawful Cohabitation
About 3 p.m. yesterday, Mr. Parley P. Pratt was met at the door of the post office by Deputy Marshal Greenman, who read to him a warrant of arrest on the charge of polygamy and unlawful cohabitation. The complaint was sown to by Marshal E.A. Ireland, and is as follows:
“That prior to the first day of January, A.D., 1883, in the County of Salt Lake, the said Parley P. Pratt did marry and take to wife on Romania Doe, whose true surname is to the complainant unknown, and did then and there have her, the said Romania, for his lawful wife; that afterwards, to wit, on the first day of May, A.D., 1883, the said Romania Pratt being then alive, he, the said Parley P. Pratt did, at the said County of Salt Lake, marry and take to wife one Susan Pulley, and did thereby then and there commit the crime of polygamy; and said complainant on his oath aforesaid, does further complain that ever since, to wit, the first day of May, A.D., 1883, hitherto, the said Parley P. Pratt has, at said county of Salt Lake, continuously lived and cohabited with more than one woman namely with one Brighamina Pratt and with one Susan Pulley.”
Mr. Pratt was taken before Commissioner McKay, where he was kept until the arrival of Mr. Dickson, after 5 o’clock. F.S. Richards appeared for the accused, requested that the examination be held in the day time, but District Attorney Dickson stated that he would be unable to attend until released from his court duties at 5 p.m., and suggested that the defendant waive examination and give bonds to await the action of the grand jury. This Mr. Richards objected to, as he had not had time to consult with his client, and the case was set to come up before the commissioner at 6 o’clock tomorrow, Wednesday evening. The following are the witnesses: Mrs. E. Newell, Parley P. Pratt, Jr., Susan Pulley, Brighamina Pratt, Dr. Romania B. Pratt, and Mrs. Mary Ann Smith.
When Mr. Pratt was taken before the Commissioner, the latter asked him some questions, such as, was he a son of Apostle P.P. Pratt, was his father killed, etc., and exhibited his anti-“Mormon” spleen by tauntingly saying to the accused that if he were in the right he need not fear, as his God would defend him.
[Journal History of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Mar. 3, 1885, 3]
[Deseret News, Mar. 3, 1885]
[transcribed and proofread by David Grow, May 2006]
********
Examination Waived
The examination of Parley P. Pratt, charged with polygamy and unlawful cohabitation, which was set for 6 o’clock last evening, at the Commissioner’s office, was not held, the defendant waiving the investigation. The case will now go to the grand jury, which meets on the 16th inst. The witness have been subpoenaed to appear at that date before that body.
[Journal History of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Mar. 4, 1885, 3]
[Deseret News, Mar. 5, 1885]
[transcribed and proofread by David Grow, May 2006]
********
The Grand Jury
The Cases of Parley P. Pratt and John C. Graham
The body inquisitorial came together yesterday morning at 10 o’clock, looking somewhat the better for its prolonged vacation; Mr. Dickson was on hand in excellent spirits, and the matters before him were plunged into at once with the keenest avidity.
The witness room was filled nearly all day long; the two principal cases under consideration—and as far as we could learn, the only ones—were those of Parley P. Pratt and John C. Graham of Provo. This latter announcement will be received with considerable surprise, as the wonder will arise why the case was not investigated by the Grand Jury of the Provo district? To this there is no answer unless it be that Mr. Dickson lacked the confidence in his Provo Grand Jury which he feels in the Salt Lake body. Among the witnesses present in the Pratt case were Dr. Romania B. Pratt, P.P. Pratt, Jr., Mrs. Brighamina Pratt, and several others….
[Journal History of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Mar. 16, 1885, 5]
[Salt Lake Herald, Mar. 17, 1885]
[transcribed and proofread by David Grow, May 2006]
********
First of the Three
Parley P. Pratt Arrested and Released on Bail
One of the three indictments against the United States law, recently found by the Grand Jury was, as generally supposed, against Parley P. Pratt. He was arrested on Wednesday at his house, in the midst of a surprise party, and being taken to court, he was charged with polygamy and unlawful cohabitation. His bonds had previously been $2,000, but they were now placed at $3,000, by Judge Zane. His brother, Alma Pratt and Jesse W. Fox, Jr., who were his securities before, signed a fresh bond and Mr. Pratt was released to go his way until his case comes up for trial.
[Journal History of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, March 25, 1885, 6]
[Salt Lake Herald, March 27, 1885]
[transcribed and proofread by David Grow, May 2006]
********
At the Utah Capital.
Memorandum of Our Special Salt Lake City Correspondent.
Parley P. Pratt has been indicted and arrested for polygamy, and is now under $3,000 bonds, awaiting trial. As to whether he is guilty or not we must do as the Irish defendant did, “wait till we hear the evidence.”
[Ogden Standard Examiner, Mar. 28, 1885]
[transcribed and proofread by David Grow, Sept. 2006]
********
P.P. Pratt’s Case
He Will Not Be a Traitor, and Gets the Full Penalty of the Law
By request of District Attorney Dickson, Judge Zane this morning dismissed the charge of polygamy made against Parley P. Pratt. The prosecutor gave as a reason, that the defendant’s first wife had been divorced from him since his marriage to the second and consequently the third and last marriage was a legal one, and the accused could not be proceeded against for that.
Mr. Pratt was then arraigned on the charge of unlawful cohabitation, and pleaded guilty.
In answer to a question by the Court, Mr. F.S. Richards stated that the defendant was a poor man, his family being dependent on him for their support, and had saved the government expense by his plea.
The Court, to Mr. Pratt—Do you propose to obey this law, or to continue to cohabit with your wives?
Mr. Pratt—I don’t propose to make any statement. I would have to consider the subject. I don’t propose to make any promise.
The Court then stated, in severe tones, that the offense was not visited by the statute with a sever punishment as compared with polygamy, though he did not see much difference in the crimes. It was an unusual occurrence in the Court to pronounce sentence in a case where the accused gave no assurance that the offense would not be continued. This defendant was not willing to say that he would not continue to cohabit with his wives and break the law of his country. The Court was not here as an individual, but in behalf of the government, and could not show any leniency in this case. He was here as the representative of a great government, wherein the fifty millions had pronounced against polygamy, and he must enforce the penalty in such a way as to carry out the purposes of the law. The sentence would therefore be six months’ imprisonment and a fine of $300.
[Journal History of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, May 2, 1885, 6]
[Deseret News, May 2, 1885]
[transcribed and proofread by David Grow, May 2006]
********
Diplomacy.
Salt Lake City, Utah, May 2—Parley P. Pratt was arrested today on the charge of polygamy. This charge was dismissed and he pleaded guilty to the charge of unlawful cohabitation. Counsel stated that the defendant was a poor man, and it having cost nothing for prosecution, they asked the leniency of the Court in considering sentence. The Court asked Mr. Pratt if he now intended to obey the law? Defendant replied he had no statement to make in that connection. The Judge grew angry and, after a severe lecture, in which he seemed to presume the defendant would in future break the law he sentenced him to six months imprisonment and fined him three hundred dollars, also naming “hard labor” which was objected to and afterwards modified. The Territorial penitentiary is specified as the place of confinement.
[Ogden Standard Examiner, May 2, 1885]
[transcribed and proofread by David Grow, May 2006]
********
Chief Justice Zane.
That was truly a humiliating spectacle which was witnessed in the United States District Court in Salt Lake City, last Saturday, when Parley P. Pratt appeared before the Judge and his Honor flew into a frenzy of passion because the defendant refused to get down on his knees and answer certain impertinent questions which the Court propounded. Because Mr. Pratt chose to make no statement in regard to his future intentions in respect to his household arrangements, Chief Justice Zane assumed the role of a judicial desperado. A few days since a train robber in Illinois asked an express messenger to open his safe that the freebooter might steal the inclosed treasure more easily, and when the staunch messenger refused to comply with the request the robber blew the faithful man’s brains out with a revolver. In the identical spirit of this murderous robber, Chief Justice Zane asked Mr. Pratt to stultify himself and when the latter ventured to maintain his honor and dignity, the enraged Judge angrily sentenced him to undergo imprisonment in the Penitentiary for six month at hard labor. This was a more severe penalty than even the law, framed by the wisdom of Congress, had provided as a punishment for the alleged crime of which Mr. Pratt pleaded guilty and at the suggestion of Mr. Richards, the attorney for the defense, his honor was compelled to retract so much of his inconsiderate and malicious sentence as referred to the matter of hard labor.
[Ogden Standard Examiner, May 4, 1885]
[transcribed and proofread by David Grow, May 2006]
********
Parley P. Pratt.
All honor to Parley P. Pratt. He has been tried as by fire and not found wanting. In obedience to the spirit of the Edmunds act and out of deference to the purposes of Congress and the laws of the land, when it was made a crime to cohabit with more than one woman he scrupulously abstained from holding sexual intercourse with his plural wives, but he was neither cowardly nor base and consequently he did not cast out the women whom he had wedded in good faith, nor throw them, homeless, dishonored and forlorn, upon the cold charities or a cruel Bohemian world. Believing that he was complying with the Edmunds act and at the same time maintaining the first principles of honorable manhood he supported the wives he had espoused and did not shamefully deny them the shelter of his roof. And now when accused of violating the law, as it is maliciously construed by a Court from which there is virtually no appeal, he bravely and honorably comes forward and pleads guilty in the hope that he may save the Government some useless expense, and that, possibly, a perverse Judge may be inclined towards a considerate leniency on account of his poverty, but when the monomaniac on the judicial seat wants to make him turn traitor—when he is naked to bow the knee to the vanity of a judicial despot—he tranquilly and modestly refuses to be bulldosed, braves the fury of the maddened judge and chooses to suffer the severest possible penalties, wrongfully inflicted, rather than to play the part of an ignoble coward. This is an act of heroism which vindicates “Mormon” sincerity; it is a spontaneous exhibition of courage and noble consistency to principle which shall be treasured in the archives of history, while it furnishes a theme for song and story to repeat down through the remotest ages of the future.
[Ogden Standard Examiner, May 4, 1885]
[transcribed and proofread by David Grow, May 2006]
********
Parley P. Pratt.
He Pleads Guilty to Unlawful Cohabitation as Defined by the Court,
But Refuses to Humble Himself Before the Inquisitorial Judge who Gets Mad and Plays Smash.
Parley P. Pratt, of the Eighteenth Ward, late poll tax collector, appeared in Court Saturday, the day set for his trial, and Mr. Dickson stated, desired to plead guilty to unlawful cohabitation; he moved for the dismissal of the charge of polygamy, which was granted, and Mr. Pratt stepped up to the bar. What follows is a verbatim account published by the Salt Lake Herald.
What is your plea to the charge of unlawful cohabitation—guilty or not guilty.
Mr. Pratt—Guilty, I suppose, under the law.
The Court—Do you wish to be sentenced now?
Mr. F.S. Richards—Mr. Pratt desires to receive sentence now.
The Court—Have you any statement to make before sentence is pronounced?
Mr. Richards—I believe the defendant does not desire to make any statement. I desire to state that he is a poor man with his families dependent upon him for support and sustenance; they are really in indigent circumstances. I think that is a matter which may properly be considered by your honor in determining the punishment is this case.
Mr. Dickson—I have nothing to say further than that as the defendant pleads guilty, and thus saves the government the expenses of a trial, that fact ought to be considered in fixing the amount of the penalty. I have nothing to say beyond that.
The Court—You say you have no statement to make?
Mr. Pratt—I do not think it is necessary to make any statement.
The Court—Well, do you propose to obey this law in the future and cohabit with one wife, or do you propose to cohabit with two?
Mr. Pratt—I do not propose to make any statement regarding what I shall do in the future. I shall have to consider. I cannot make any promises.
The Court—Do you wish time to consider, or have you considered?
Mr. Pratt—I think so.
The Court (very severely and earnestly)—This offense of unlawful cohabitation is not visited in this statue with a very severe punishment, as compared with the punishment imposed upon the offense of polygamy. There is not so much difference in the two offenses, except that one is necessarily according to a form of marriage, whereas the other—cohabitation—is not necessarily so. Persons, perhaps, could cohabit without any form of marriage. It is an unusual thing for the Court to pronounce a sentence upon an accused person, where the person gives no assurance that the crime will not be continued by him. The presumption is, of course, that a man when he has committed a crime, will not continue to commit it. But the defendant in this case is not willing to say that he will not continue to cohabit with two women—to violate the laws of his country—that he will go from this courthouse and continue to be a criminal before the law, and thus corrupt the morals of this community with respect to his institution of marriage. I cannot show the least degree of leniency to any man who takes that position. I appear here not as an individual. My sympathies have nothing to do with it. But I appear here as the representative of a great government, the greatest, as we think, upon the face of the globe, and in which fifty millions of people have pronounced this crime of polygamy and unlawful cohabitation wrong, and I must enforce the law in such a way as will suppress the crime, protect society from the corrupting influence of polygamy and unlawful cohabitation as will carry out the purposes of the law, and as will reflect the intention of the will of the people. That being so, I pronounce the sentence to be $300 fine six months’ imprisonment in the penitentiary (here he paused, and then added with emphasis), with hard labor.
Mr. Richards—I desire to call your honor’s attention to the fact that there can be no labor, hard or otherwise, in this case. The Supreme Court of the United States so decided in the Reynolds case, on a statute similar to this.
The Court—The language, as found in most of the statutes, is specified as “hard labor;” but in this Territory, as there is no such thing provided, I suppose there will be no labor attached to the punishment. Therefore, the sentence will be modified in that respect.
Mr. Pratt at once retired. In the afternoon he was escorted to the Penitentiary, from which he will probably not be released until December next, the sentence really being one for seven months’ imprisonment, as he is unable to pay his fine.
[Ogden Standard Examiner, May 4, 1885]
[transcribed and proofread by David Grow, May 2006]
********
Substantial Sympathy
We mentioned a few days since that a subscription was being taken up in Manti for the benefit of Parley P. Pratt, one of those now in the Penitentiary, for having cohabited with their wives. We learn from a gentleman just up from Sanpete, that this action was quite spontaneous on the part of the Manti citizens, and was equally the result of their admiration for the firm stand he had taken in refusing to make the promises which the prosecution demanded, and their sympathy for the family, who were deprived of their only means and support by the persecutive penalty inflicted upon him. Within an hour from the time the subscription was started, a considerable quantity of flour and bacon had been donated—sufficient probably to supply his family in that line during the term of his imprisonment. These provisions were shipped to this city in connection with freight for S.P. Teasdel, who, with his usual generosity, paid the freight on them, and will have the same delivered at their destination. This is a substantial kind of sympathy, a little of which is worth more than all the tears that could be shed over the humiliation and suffering to which our brethren and their families are being subjected at the hands of the oppressors.
[Journal History of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, May 15, 1885, 3]
[Deseret News, May 15, 1885]
[transcribed and proofread by David Grow, May 2006]
********
Local News
Liberated—At a quarter before six o’clock this morning, Brother Parley P. Pratt was released from confinement in the penitentiary.
[Journal History of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Oct. 15, 1885, 3]
[Deseret News, Oct. 15, 1885]
[transcribed and proofread by David Grow, May 2006]
-End-