New-York daily tribune., 1858-04-05

We publish elsewhere in tO-day's paper letter
on the Territorial code Of Utah, embodyng msuy
curou. e1trscts from the Mormon laws. These ex-
tracts, however are not so entirely new to the pup
lie as our correspondent seems to suppose. TIE
substance, at least, of large part of them was
embodied in the speech OF Mr. Eorl. on Mormon
affairs, delivered at the last session Of Congress
aid printed in our columns.
In speaking of these laws a. Oppressive, IN
constitutional ard Infamous, our correspondent
appears to US to indulge in astye Of invective some
what more pungent than the facts Of the case would
seem to warrant. Few, if any, of our State codes
tsken in hand with the vigorous spirit OF crit
icism, but would afford at least equal occasion for
the use of these epithets. As to the ordinance in-
cooperating the Mormon Church, it is hard to see
how it differs from a multitude Of other acts COD
ferring on ecclesiastical bodies similar corporate
character. The jurisdiction given BY this act 70 the
Church is expressly limited to its own Internal DIS
cipline, except in the mstter Of solemnlzmg msf-
risges, which privilege, however, is nothing more
than a our State laws confer on all our clergy, Oh
all denominations.
As TO the extensive jurisdiction conferred upon
the Probate Courts of Utah it was natural enough
that the people of that Territory should have pre-
ferred to give sl the authority possible to their own
local tribunals, and We very much fear that IN tne
character of some of the Judges who derived their
commissions from Washington, they had but too
much reason for that method of procedure. Inc
people of Kansas. We may observe, have resorted
10 the very same e1pedient for delivering them
selves, as far as possible from the jurisdiction OF
such Judges as Lecompte and Cato.
1t may also be very true that, in the matter OF
tmber-cuttiDg and water privileges, the Territorial
LEGISLATURE of Utah has assumed an authority to DIS
pose of the public lands nowhere expressly
conferred upon it. But here was case
in which regulation by somebody was aoso'
lutely necessary. The MormOns are all squat
ters, and everybody knows that it is COM
mon for squstters on the public lands to form asso
Citations and make rules to which the whole squat
ting community are obliged to conform, often under
very heavy penalties. 1t doubtless happens that
the leading and shrewdest men among the Nor
mons know how to make these regulations specially
advantageous to themselves, but the same thing
happens eveIywhere nor in fact, in these matters
is private emolument always inconsistent with the
public good.
On the whole, we cannot agree that anything
which our correspondent has cited from the code Of
Utah-however some of its provisions might and
ought to have received negative from Congress-
will Justify the new process of legislation which he
proposes for that Territory. The charge now made
s, that tie Government of Utah is really despOt-
ism, the whole power of legislation being. in fact,
exercised by Brigham Young. But will the Gov
erpment be any the less despOtism by transferring
that absolute power of legislation from Brigham
Young to Gov. Cumming and Judge Eckel' II
it be hardship and Inconvenience that the Nor
mon msority overlook, in their laws, the wishes
and feelings of the few Gentle sojourner among
them, would it not be likely to be the occasion Of
at least equal hardship incOnvt Dience and in-
Justice to vest the entire legislative authority OF
the Terrific ry in this Gentle minority That same
Justice and equality of civil and political rights
which We demand for the Gentle minority, at the
hands of the resident Mormon majority Of Utah.
We must on our side be ready to cOncede to the
Mormon majority. 1t will hardly do TO set up that
the religious profession Of MormOnism, whether by
individuals or community, shall involve total
forfeiture of all political rights.