The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1882-05-07

sovereign power their "uoIe Plan ma!
heen to prepare for 8 success ful secession
from the authority OF the United States
and a permanent establishment Of theil
On the 18th of February, 1868, Senator
Wsje. in report submitted to the Sen
ate OH United States in reference t.
! m fiji E, used the following Ian
..Ib- customs which have prevailed in
all our territories in the government o.
nuhlic affairs have had but little tolera.
lion in the territory Of Utah; but in their
$ cad there appears to be, overriding al
o,ber influences, sort of Jewish theOc-
rscv. gradusted to the condition Of that
territorv, This theocrscy having q su-
preme head who governs and guides
every affair of importance II the church,
and practically in the territory, is the
only real power acknowledged here: AID
to the extension of whose Interests every
person in the territory must directly o.
indirectly conduce. We have here the
first exhibition, within the limits Of the
United States. Of . church ruling the
state" (Thhiy-EeYenth Congress, third
session, Rep. Go MI No. 81
In January, 1866, certain resolutions
we're referred tnthe com mittee on the ter
ritories of the House Of Represen tatives,
instructing them to Enquire and ascer-
tain what means, civil or military, might
lawfully be- resorted tc to effectually eradi-
cate the evil of polygamy from the land,
what legislation WAS needed for that pur-
pose, and why the law against polygamy
was not enioI CT d, also, q resolution in
structing the same commlttee to inquire
into the exped; ncv Of reporting q bill
providing for he repeal u the law organ
izing the territory of Utah and for Ovid
ing said territory and attaching a por-
ton thereof to the state Of Nevada, and
Ghe residue 10 the territories contiguous
to Utah.
That comm ttee, through Hjn. j. NJ.
Ashley, chsirmaD, reported July q, 1866
that they were unable 10 agree upon any
plan which seemed TO them to promise
practical solution of the abuse and evils
complained of, and which we're admitted
to exist. They postponed the further con.
Eideration Of the matter and reported the
testimony.
The committee state that "the testi-
mony discloses the fact that the laws Of
the United States are openly aud def
nitely violated throughout the territory,
and that an armed force is necessary to
preserve the peace and give security to
the lives sndi property Of citizens Of the
United States residing therein" III.
Rep. No. SO, Thirty-ninth Congress, first
session.
Express statute passed July, 1862, ~
Stat. at L., sol, 502.) provides suitable
penalties for the violation Of the law
against polygsmy. Have the people Of
Utah obeyed this statute?
Did this community then submit to
that law and obey 1t? Or have they since
lived in its open violation?
Poly gsmy has alsrmingly increased since
the passage of the law. Brigham Young
himself was one of the first to violate it,
publicly espousing another wife on the
18th Of January. 1868.
In the summer of 1868 Judge Drake,
upon the hearing of hGbeGS corpES
case, ordered that q girl who had been
inveigled into plural" marriage with
8 Mormon bishop should be returned to
the custody Of her mother, and the mar
shall was ordered ty execute the decree.
But the people seized the girl as she was
passing out IF the court house, bore her
off in triumph, aud delivered here to The
bishop.
Judge Drake tells US that "since the
commencement of 1865 polygamy has in
creased at least 100 per cent throughout
the territory. Previous to the year 1868
this doctrine or practice was not generally
held to be aIeligious necessity. but merely
> tolerance to be INDUCED in by those
who desired it. 1t is now held 10 be
/ cardinal point. That and the shedding
If the blood of apoststes to save their
souls IRE the two soul-saving doctrines of
he Mormon faith" (Ststement of Hon
Thomas j. Drake, II. Mis-. Doc. No. s5,
econd session, Fortieth Congress, pages
}, 10.J
The question then arises, shall COM
nunity be represented in the Congress of |
he United States who are thus living in
pen violatisn of law passed for the !
of the highest interests of co.
iety aud of the state7
We have thus considered the question
! reference to polygsmy generally |
Iithout referring specially to those OBJ !
Gene aud disgusting practices which are
l this case conc0mitsnts. Incest in its
srious forms and under various names
prscticed and encouraged.
The marriage of man with the
lother and her daughters indiscrimi-
ately and marriage with q hslf-sister
re- permitted. William HepworIh
ixon says that Brigham Young ad-
lifted to him in conversation that he
W no objection to the marriage Of
-other and sister. But he spoke for
imself only, as be thought the church
as not yet prepared for so strong doc
inc. New America, by William Hep
orth Dixon, page 2l6.)
BY reference to q sermon preached by
Dung, April s, 1858, and reported 10 the
eseTet NetOS, volume 8. No u, it will {
seen that he thought it (the church)
epared for another doctrine equally as
rong-the marriage Of mother with {
sr own son. {
Such are The doctrines and practices
lich are sought to be established and {
into the framework of So {
'ty in the heart of this continent. Isit
t time that the representative of this !
rrupt, licentious, this tyrannicsI, tai
-ous, and bloody priesthood shall be 8
1T back to his constituents with instruc- t
ms to abandon their unwarrantsbla as i
mptions Of temporal power, obey the L
vs. and remodel their government so q
1t it shall conform to the spirit of our 8
e institutions? t
Mr. Moulton, who makes the minor G
report In this case, testiies to the p
ne effect IN his speech !oR polygamy, Il