The New York herald., 1870-08-21
families N r-rssl q that time, = q. - proved

refer. n were necessary, 10 rhe existence OF this
principle ccoxnixsng TIE rixas of the nrst born IN
monerarnic and pcygamic families prior TO the date
o. ths iaw. Thts seems 20 he rivcn 70 regulate an
institution that had prior existence. VIII refer,
iei0re pass from tbs passage % another, To ihe
monoganic ismIiy OF isaao, whcicln We have the
declaration thai Esau ana Jacob. being twins had a
! dispute OF a. leas therv wa Nj feeling on the
| part of Esau heC4usc JACOB ~ certain time had
purchased IN rights Of TIE ara bcrn-that II. his
brhrlshL Ths ggs bora. taoayh they were twins
aaa oaiy perhaps few momtIt. Intervening be-
twcea thr hira "a ihe nra aBd the hlrla Of
ond. or boa snort period of Tine yei he hal rights
ana those rghis were respected AMI honorei man,
centuries before the dAys d Mo.e2
Ths wss monoxsmlc famiis - far are In
fornei Cor r l.aae had mofe wives than one we
are nOl iaformed upoa that subject Gar the
| Bitae ~ conceraed. We come Co Jacob. Ne was a
poygainist. and wa nrst born pcrtained 10 the
father and not 10 ihe mother. There were not four
first born males N the family oi JaoOb who
tf,led 10 the rights Of tbe arst born but only one.
The nrs, born q tins polygamsc talnily was Ruben,
aud ne woaid have retained the birthrighi had he
not transgres-ed me lac of Because OF that
transrrcssson he lost that puyuege. u wss taken
| from him aud was gwen 20 Joseph. or rather 10
| the two sons ~ Joseph, you win nnd re-
corded IN the nih chapter of The First Chronicles
here, then ne nghu ~ the Drst born were
acknowledged IN Do;B polygamc and monogamic
families before the Law under consideration was
given. The house OF lsrsel wss not ony founded in
poygamy. but the two wives OF Jacob ana tue two
landmarks who were also called his wives in
places. were the ~omes WITH whom he begst the
twelve sons from whom the Twelve tribes OF Israel
sprang. Polygamy, therefore, having existed. and
originated II we're. with Israel or Jacob IN that
nation. was continued among them from generation
90 generation down until the time Of the comlls OF
Christ; and these laws, therefore Intended TO
regulate Institution already existence. II the
law is limited 10 monogamic families only. n win
remain for my learned opponent 10 bring iortn esi
dence 10 establish this fact.
We Will next refer 20 a passage which wiz be
found la Exodus, xxi., 10. IL may be well 10 read
seventh verse:-"And N a man sell bis daughter 10
De maidservaDt she shall NOT 60 out the mem
betrothed her to himself then s6sil ne iet her he re-
deemed: 10 sell her unto strange nation he shall have
no power, seeing ne hath dea deceitlully VITA her
And n lie have betrothed her unto his son he shall
deal with her after the manner or daughters. And
II he take him another VIE her food her raiment
and her duty OF marriage shall he not diminish"
Aud also the following. the eleventh verse:--"And
II ne do not these three unto her then shall she 20
out tree without money" 1 think, from the nature
oil this passage that IL certainly have reference
TO the legal lawful wives AZ least theJ are thus AZ.
nominated. IL may oe that objection Will be taken
10 the word ''wife"-.'another wife'-from the fact
that 1t is In italcs and substituted Dy the
lators OF King James, according to the best Jude
The context l do not intend al present
to dwell at any great length upon these passages,
merely declaring stating THAI this does sanction
poygamy, so lar as my Judgment and opinion goes
and, 90 far as me wording OF the scriptures 20, II
does seem 10 sanction the taking OF alyiler vile
while the first Is still living. II this word "wIen
should be translated ''woman.n and merely n be-
uothed woman, that, perhaps, might ater he case,
provided that it be proved. ~ may be thnt
original Will be referred TO thls subject aBd II
may not, we have the liberty believe, OF taking
the Bible according To King James lans.aiiO1. or
find any original. Bot so fal As the original
Is concerned, from which inIs Bible ~ translated.
Is not In existence. The last Information have
concerning the original manuscripts from which
tbis Bible was translated rs that fhey were empo,ed
in the formation OF kites ana used Tor amusement,
instead OF being preserved With regard O. q sfeaI
many other manuscripts, would STATE hat Ley
may, perhaps agree with the original OF ning iaIcs'
translation. they may not We have testimony aud
evidence in the Encyclopedia Metropolitans tai the
namber Of readings that dluer materially one isom
another. We have the statement made bs s0ae oi
the best informed men that In several inst tuCes 10
| has been stated that there are 5000 diltreut
readings of those old manuscripts hoia when tie
Bible has been Translated from s0me OF those mana.
scripts into the English language. Bui a thefc are
| 30 many different readings men might dispute over
them all the days Of their lives, and there would be
difference OF opinion sum- TINS, therefore ~, la
my judgment another law regulating poiygamy.
| win now refer TO another law on The suhlect 81
| polygamy. In the twenty-nth chapter oi Deutcr-
ODouly commencing Al the tltl verse, ~ A. WI tte
"lf brethren dwell together" Now, itls well enough
in read ng this to refer 10 the margin, We have
the liberty, believe. TO DO 50, and yOu VIII bnt
tnat In the margin the word 'bretnrenn is also
translated near kinsmeD.n III brethren or an
other words, ''near kinsnenn dwell together and
one OF them die and have no child, the wile of the
dead snail not marry without unto stranger; her
husbands brother shall go unto her. and take her
TO him 10 WIFE, and perform The duty oi husband's
brother unto her And II snail be thai the rst corn
which she beaTeth shall succeed IN The name OI MS
brother which Is dead that his name be not puf TOT
Israel And If the man IKE NOT 10 take ms brothers
WIFE, then let MS brothers. wile 20 up 10 Tue gate
unto the elders aud say. My husbands brother
fuseh to raise up unto ms brother name IN israc
he viii not perform the duty oi my HUSBAND
brother Then the elders OF his city shall call HIM
anu speak unto INN: and II he stand 90 H. and say.
like not 10 take her: Then shall MS brother wue
| come unto him IN the presence oi the elders and
loose his shoe from or his foot, and sp' IN Ds lace
and shal answer and say. 80 snail u DC done uuio
tnat man That VIII not Dulld up MS urotners housc
And his name shali pe called III Israel. Tue house %.
| nun that hath his shoe loosed." what
| has this says one, with p0iygamy The
| law is general. 1t is binding upon brelhrcn
and upon ali near kinsmen dwelling together, not
unmarried brethren or unmarried klnsnlen, but the
married ana the unmarried The law II general II
| IL can be proved from the original or rom any
source Whatever the law Is not general hen
point viii nave TO be yielded but, unLi tAat can tee
proved here IS The law, Wnicn not Only sanctions
poiynany but absolul ely commands II. And II we
! could nnc law where the command Is
given, then, o! course the prIncipie oil plurality oi
| wives would be established upon permanent foot
IN and equal ia authority. equal III legality, TO tnat
| oi moncgamy. This law OF God absolutely ooes
! thus command all persons, whether married or
married 1t makes no difference, brethren dwelling
| together "&lnsmen dwelling together which
shows that, or course, il IS not unmarried persons
living IN the same mousse tnaV II meant, Dul persons
| dWellng together IN the neighDorh0od
| ~ the country, In Israel-as " IL
| wen known that Israel, In ancient days
did thus dwell together, and the law was binding
upon them. Tnis was calculated 20 make q vast
! number OF poygamists among the House Of Israel
ironl that day down 10 the coming OF Christ; ana
also the Christian religion must have admitted those
polygamists into the Church Of God, because they
Would have been Condemned IL they had not
observed this law. There was penalty attached 70
the law. and they could not be justified aud refuse
10 obey il. II was not an honorable refusal ano IN
ac ". r.
haps thousands, of poygamists among Israel in the
day that Jesus came, who were living In obedience
10 tins law ana who would have been condemned II
they had disobeyed the law, when the Gospel was
preached to them II they could not be admitted
Do the Christian Church without diyorclng their
| wives the case must have been hard with them.
! IhaL LheY. llrnugh their Obedlence 70 GOd's law