The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1858-07-01

TINS statute IS imprisonment tor period OF not
less than three nor more than twenty years, or
by fine not less than three hundred nor more
than one thousand dollars, or both BY fine and
imprisonment, at the discretion OF the jury try
ing the cause.
"No conseq uences in which large proper.
ton of this people may be involved, in .conse-
quence of their criminal practice, will deter
You from fearless discharge of your duty.
1t is yours to find the facts, and to return in.
dictments, without fear, favor, affection, reward,
or any hope thereof The law was made to
punish the lawless and disobedient, and society
is entitled to the salutary effects of its ex.
ecution."
very annoying" says Washington cor
respondent of the N. p. Tribune, is this charge
to the Administration, and it is feared that
it will produce trouble" He adds: "the doc
trine asserted will be repudiated as neither law
nor common sense" The Tribune itself, no
better pleased with the charge, thinks the first
thing to be done is, to remove the whole body
of civil officials subordinate to the Governor,
with Chief Justice Echols at their head" 1t
does not seem to MS that there is much occs-
sion for Republican indignation against the
Judge. That Party is as decidedly committed
against Polygamy as Slavery. Mr.. Morrill,,
Republican Representative labored earnestly
for the passage of bill to repress the crime.
1t is hardly worth while for the champions of
Freedom to grow very angry with Judge for
being possibly a little over-zealous against
system which enslaves and brutalizes woman.
For one, we have not gone so far in our admi.
ration of "Squatter Sovereignty" as to sup.
pose it may screen Polygsmy from indictment
and punishment. If Judge Echols can find
law existing under which it may be suppressed,
we bid him God speed, and honor his courage
If there be no such law, Congress ought to en-.
act one.
That the Administration is annoyed" and
the Union displeased, is not surprising. The
charge enunciates doctrine which "kills two
birds with one stone" 1t is, that the munich
pal laws of Mexico existing in the Territory at
the time We acquired it by treaty, we're not
changed by the act of cession. They prohibit
ed both Polygamy and Slavery, and the Judge
believes that the law prohibiting Polygamy
has not been altered since; therefore, q plu.
ralty of wives is illegal. Well, is not this good
law? The Republicans, to say nothing of Henry
Clay, Thomas 81. Benton, and other distin :.
guished Southern statesmen, held the same
view in relation to Slavery. That had been
prohibited by the law of Mexico; the law con.
tinued in force after the cession the terrific.
ries acquired from her, in which it prevailed,
therefore continued free. Judge Echols, then,
is certainly sustained by the highest authority.
The Union may dissent, but the Tribune should
not pronounce against the doctrine as g neither
law nor common sense"
The Judge having shown that under the law
a man can have but one wife, all illegal inter.
course between the sexes. if either party have
husband or wife living, is adulterous. We
believe that is common sense; at least it is the
voice of common decency in the States. But,
continues the Judge, there is statute in the
Territory for Furnishing adultery. As this is a
statement of fact, we presume that the Judge
is q little better informed than we who are liv.
ing on the Atlantic seaboard. But if there be
such law, and if plurality of wives be illegal,
will any one be good enough to tell us why
polygamy is not punishable in Utah, and why
Chief Justice Echols should be removed by
Mr.. Buchanan, for instructing the grand jury
that it is indictsble?
The comments of the Union are rather inco.
herent:
ave knew and regretted the existence of DO.
lygamy, that the pluralty-wife system prevailed
at least amongst the Mormon priesthood. We
ha1, G.: LIZ ~
and We wonder exceedingly that it could be es.
tAblished anywhere on this continent, under
the predominant control of the American mind.
1t exists, however, in Utah, undeniably
"But we did not send the army to Utah even
to beat down polygamy. We have an abiding
faith that it can be done otherwise, and that.
in any possible contingency, to use force to i'm.
prove the moral condition of distant people
like the Mormons would simply be to set the
army to the discharge of duty which they are
not we'll qualified to perform. We are not vet
advanced far enough into the intenstp of civil.
ization to enter upon the work of religious
crusades."
This is all wide of the mark. The srmy has
nothing to do with the question There is no
for a religious crusade. Is the doc
trine of Judge Echols true or false? IF true.
Polygamy is illegal in Utah. Is his statement
of the law as relates to adultery correct or incor
rect? Ii correct, Polygamy is indictable as
crime; he would be delinquent, did he not 80
instruct the grand jury, and the jury would be
delinquent, did it not so present it. The Union
might as well talk of administering the Law
against murder, being religious crusade 1"
"We are led to these remarks" SAYS the
Union, Shy reading the charge of Judge
Echols to the Grand Jury of Utah, which will
be found In another column. This is an inter.
esting chapter with which the new force intro.
duces itself to the Mormon people. We are no
friends of the plurality wife system, but we deny
that we have or may exercise any riphtful
power over the subject. The whole system of
Mormon religion belongs exclusively to the
people of Utah. If We may not look to them
for the needful correction, we may surely RELY
upon the energy and moral force of the Amer.
can people to apply appropriate remedies.
We have no faith or confidence in mere
crusades. We have had enough of that kind
OF moral disinfectant in the history of modern
temperance and anti Slavery reforms. 1t is
far better to suffer under the operations Of q
disease, than to seek its removal by violent and
unauthorized means"
NO rlghtiui power over the subject of Polyg-
amy Oh, no. The People must be left at
liberty to form their domestic institutions in
their own way Baptize any system in the
name OF Religion, consecrate any villainy
as social or domestic institution" and
you place it beyond the reach of Law. Let the
Polygamists of Utah add widowburniDg and
nfanticide to their list of social or domestic in.
stitutions, after the pattern of Oriental Civil
cation, or make them part of their religion,