The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1870-08-23

thing In opposition, II possible. heard remarka-
tory. 1t certainly was pleasing 70 my ear. It ieIl
upon me like the dew OF heaven It were 30 far as
0ratorica flourish Is concerned; but whore was the
rebutttng testimony, where the evidence brought
forhg F0rty.nne minutes of the time was occupied
before 1t was even referred to. Forty-nine minutes
passed away IN the flourish OF 0ratory without the
proofs being rebutted ana the evidence examined.
Then eleven minutes were lett aid expect
would in some small degree rebnt the numerous
evidences that were brought iorth IN the DIVINE
waited In vaiD TO be sure, one passage, and only
one, that was brought forth In deuteronomy was
merely referred TO, and then Without exanlng that
polygamy; another Item that was referred to by
myself IN regard TO Lamech and Cam was brought
up instead OF the examination OF that PASSAGE. aud
until the close OF the eleven minutes The subject OF
Abel's sacrihce and Gains sacrifice and Cam going
10 Inc land Of Nod to marry wife, &c. All these
Things were examined. but these testimonies that
were brought forth were left untouched.
Now, tne we VIII proceed 10 the nth, that Is the
hrsC great form OF marriage that was established in
Tie bcginillng-one man cct atei Tor one woman.
However before we dwHi upon this subject let mo
we VIII commence on this argument. did not state
Yesterday afternoon, as II was represented by the
land of Nod and there married WIFE for there Is no
such thing IN the Bible stated that Cain went TO
the land OF Nod after having murdered hts brother
ADel. 1 stated that we were not 10 suppose
that Cod had created another woman in the
Ia lang Of or NOD; That Cain TOOK. mis- WI, wie
But we are to suppose that he took his wife with
him; but when ne arrived in the land OF Nod he
this to do with ard to Inc form OF marriage Does
itprovc anything No. The murder that Cain com
nltted IN staying his brother Abel does not prove
anything against the nonosanic form OF marriage;
neither anything IN fuvor Of 1t. IL stands ~ an
Isolated fact that u wicked man may he monoea-
rs is recorded IN the Bible, was the first
poiygamnlst; the list on record. Taere
tnosanas ' ,hst are no here u rseorc
There were thousands ana tens OF thousands OF
monogamlsts. ana yet believe that we have only
three cases or mOnO.amistS recorded during the
period nom the creation down 10 the hood, some
1000 years and upwards. The sileace OF Scripture,
therefore, In regard To the number OF polygansts IN
that day IA no evidence whatever. But ~ has been
asserted before this congregation Jlat this Is the
iirsS case recorded OF polygamist and that
necCon herewith murder was committed. add it
mas been indicated or inferred that the murier
M %sav Committed 81, IN defence OF poi,gamy.
bring forth proof from that Bible
from the beginning TO Tie end 10 prove thaE murder
form OF marriage Of Lamecn. II had nothing to do
with II. 1t is True he revealed his crime TO wives,
but the cause OF his crime Is not stated IN the book
what mas that to do, then, with The divinity OF the
great institution established In the Bible called
poiygamyf Nothing at an, II does not condemn
murder condemns the other form Of marriage or
justifes It,
Having disposed of these two questions let me
now come To the first monogainist, nalnely-AdaIn.
Let us examine his character and the character of
his monogamic wiie. Lamech slew young man to
MS wOnndinG young man 10 his hurt-that
was killing one was IL nOts How many did Adam
Kill, the first monogamst ALI tie world Of mankind
ne murdered the whole human race. daughter.
How2 BY falling in the Garden OF Eden. Would
mankind have dled II It had not been FOR the SINS OF
Adam ali died. 80 in Christ shall ali De male aiiSen
It was by the ransgresson OF the frst mono samist
and hH monogamic Vile tnat all mankind nave TO
undergo the penalty or dealh. He was the cause,
and presume it viii he acknowledged even Dy
mon0Rainsts that this was very great CRIME
What can be compared to i2 Can CAMS crime or
lIa of
bringing death ana destruction not only upon the
people who lived in the early age but upon the whole
human racer
But what IS all that TO do regard TO the divine
institution OF marriage NoShny at ali. 1t does
not prove one thing or the other. But when argu-
ments OF this description entered iulO by The
opponents OF polygamy 1t is well to examine their
ments, TO see whether they will stand the test OF
Scripture or stand the test OF sound reason sound
argument and sound judgment.
Moreover Adam was not only guilty OF bringing
death ana destruction upon the whoe human race,
but he was the means OF Introducing "a Illien
CAIN stay his brother X6eif Because he Was s'a a
Descendants OF that fallen being. He was q person.
age that had come forth nom the loins OF
had brought death Into the world. Why did La
mech slay that young many Because the great first
couple OF mOnOgamsts That hau existed nad brought
death and destruction into tne world. When we
look abroad and see all the various crimes, lnclud-
ing murder, that exist on the face OF our uione.
wnen we see mankind committing themselves TO ali
manner OF degradation and lust and destroying one
another what are the causes that produced ali
couple transgressed the laws oi heaven.
The reverend gentleman refers Us 10 The saying OF
that great man Martin Luther concerning the rcia-
ton that exists between husband and wife, 1t was
. beautiful argument nave no .ault whatever Cd
~ is w "'i Jus. as , 70 poygas as
tner to the question that was put to him, why COD
took the female from che side OF man. Il Just as ap-
propriate, just az proper. jlst as consistent with
Inc plural form Of marriage as IL is with the
other form. lie did not Lake the woman from
the head. Whyp The argument wa, thar
the man should DO the head, or, as Paul
says .'rne man Is the head OF the woman, That
is his position, and believe my learned opponent
agrees with me perfectly In this. We nave no dis
pute whatever upon this ground. Why did He not
take the woman from the iooty Because man Ii
no. To tyrannize over his wife and Tread her under
foot Why did He take her from his side Because
the rib lies nearest to the heart, showing The posi-
uon OF % st not only ono woman, but two
women, all come under the protection OF this one
head. Jesus says, mo man can serve TWO masters,
because ne must nate The and love the other,
cleave unto one ana turn away from tile other"
That Is very true.
But let US now examine poygamy, for that was
referred to yesterday; and the reverend gentleman
could not sec why If man had the liberty OF taking
more wives than one, why woman should not have
Inc same prlvucEe. II God has granted to the wo-
man any such privilege II Is not expressed ID the
Bible. The other Is expressed and 1t remains for
Inc reverend gentleman TO dlsprove II. But then.
again. when we come to reason IN regard 20 polyg.
andry, where woman was TO have more husbands
tnan one. what was the object OF the creation? One
OBJECT was compromising, he told U.s. That Is very
good agree with the gentleman in this
respect Another object was pr0crealon. Very good.
agree Win Inc gentleman alsJ IN the second 90.
lect Another object was prevention 1 agree with
HIM 80 lar Is the argument Is carried out ~ regard
10 THIS tn Its true light But let US examine tue
second opJcct-namely, procreariOn. The Lord In
stituteu marraXe-tne great bonds Of marriage--for
tne sake OF multiplying the human species here
upon the earta. Does polyandry assist us in the
multiplicatlon OF the human spccics-a woman
having four or i've or SIX or twenty or fifty nus
9altls-does IL tend to multiply the human race?
think that monogamsts as well as pOlygamists,
when tney come 10 rehect upon this particular po.nt
will see That woman with more husbands than one
destroys her OWL ruirfulness think there would
he no dispute upon that subject. IT, peradventure
y woman should even have offspring by q plurality
OF husbands, there would be another great difficulty
In The Way-thc father would be unknown. Laugh.
teri would IT not be so 1t destroys ali knowledge
OF the paternity, all knowledge OF the husband. VI
the protector or the wife all knowledge or the father
IL lost among the children. Is this the case with
plurality OF wives Not by any means. III q man
mad ifty wives the knowledge OF the rather is IN