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

the government or the y nlted States.
2. tits 9 disgrace to our civilization
and offensive to the moral sense Of man
kind.
8. It breeds open defsnce Of our laws,
and renders. republican form Of govern
ment impossible where it prevails.
5. 1t isIhostile to civil society, and fats
to the welfare Of the State
Is Mr.. CANNON A PoLYGANIsT?
We next inquire, is Mr.. Cannon a
DoiyRamist? I hat be Is, IN the fullest
broAuest and most complete sense, il
proven by hls OWL C 'nfessiUn, over his
own signature, II. the following:
In the mAtt-r OF George O. Cannon
Contest of Alien o. CIR pbell's right
10 : seat in tn House If Representa-
tiges If the Fo ty-seve' th Congress o.
the ULited State. as delegate from the
Ter uoIy II Titan:
Il, G.. rgo G Cannon contestant, pro-
testm that the n alter 10 this paper con-
t4lned j. not relative 10 the issue, do sd-
NIT thst am q member Of the Church
Of Jesus Christ Of La ter-dsy Saints, COM
monty called Mormons; that in accord
snce with the tenets Of said church l
| have ken plural wives, who low live
with me. and have so lived with me for 8
mum Der of years, ard borne me children.
l also admit that in my public addresses
as . ter cher Of my religion in Utah ter
ritcry have defended sal tenet of said
church IS being 10 my belief revelation
from God. GEORGE Q CANNON"
This paper was given by Mr.. CanRon
n inf 10 inf
the proof fully and squzrely, which be
r. pOsed 10 do by calling witnesses Rho
| would have been compelled to disclose
the facts. The paper was intended to DO
an unqualified surrender and agreement
as to the fact Of his being q polygamist
IN The b:oadest sense, and must be so
considered. It therefore distinguishes
this contest from all those that have pre-
coded 1t in which this question of polyg-
amy was raised. In the last contest
which Mr.. Cannon had with Mr.. Max.
well, in the Forty.third Congress (1874),
he denied most emphAtically that he was
''liviDg with four wives or liviJg or CO.
hAbiting with any wives in defiant or
wilful violation Of the law Of Congress
Of 1862" He denied that he was then
Giving, OF had ever lived, in violation OF
the laws Of God, man, his country, de-
eency, or civilization, or of any law Of
the United States" These broad deniRls
on the very issue which was the chief one
involved in that contest doubtless had 3
great deal to do with the finding in Mr..
Cannon's favor.
But in this contest we have not only
no denial, but an open confession. We
have = man knocking for admission at
our doors who is 8 confessed preacher and
prscticer and apostle and defender Of
polygsmy in its most Odious form; who
declares that he is member of the Nor
mon church, which he claims teach that
it is right and righteous TO marry more
than one wife, has taken plural wives
and lived and cohsbited with them, and
they nave borne him children, ard who
has taught and teaches this doctrine as a
revelation from God. The plain and IN
Ambiguous question now is whether such
q man, under the law Of the land and
the customs and perrogstives of this
House, Is qualified to hold 4 seat as q
delegate from the Territory Of Utah?
The Parliament of England, one
Of the greatest legislative bodies
oa the earth, has just expelled by
an overwhelming vote 8 person who
sought to hold q seat amongst its
members because in the light Of this
Christian century he profanely avoWed
his disbelief In the existence Of 8 God.
This could not have been done in this
government, under whose constitution
mo religious test shall ever be required
as qualification for any Office under the
United States" But polygamy has been
held by the Supreme Court of the alton [
not to be religion, but q crime.
Cb:ef-J Justice Waite, in delivering the !
unanimous opinion Of the court in Rey-
nolds OS. U nited States, after fully defn- |
ing what is. the religious freedom which |
has been guaranteed under the constitu- |
ton, says:
POlygsmy has always been odious
among the northern and western natiOL
of Europe, and, until the establishment
OF the Mormon church, almost exclu-
sively feature of the life of Asiatic and
African people. At common law the
second marriage was always void, e
Kents Com. 1877 and from the earliest
history OF England, polygamy has been :
treated as an Otfense against society. At
Ter tDe establishment of the ecclesias, ical
courts an j. until the time of James l, it
was punished through the instrum entail J
ty of those tribunals, not merely because =
rights had been violated, :
but because upon the separation of the :
ecclesiastical courts from the civil, the o
were supp sed TO be the a
most appropriate for the trial of matri- T
nonial causes snd offenses against the !
lights of marriage. just as they were for i
causes and the settlement of :
he Estates Of deceased persons.
By the statute Of James I, chapter IL, =,
he ofense, if committed in England or y
" ales, was made punishable in the civil :
ourts, and the penalty was de4th. As G
his statute was limited in its operations
d England aud Wales. it was at very u
arly period re-enacted, generally with {.
ONE notifications, in all the colonies, Z
n connection with the case we ara now
oDsidering, it is significant fact that. Z
n the 9Th Of December, 1888, after the -.
ssssge Of the act establiihing religious u
-eedom, and after the convention Of 9
Tirginia had recommended, Is a. Z
meDdmeDt TO the constitution OF =
le United States, the declaration tc
/ bill OF rights that "all men tI
len have an equal, natural, and inalien- o
bic right to the free exercise Of religion, n
10 the dictates Of conscience" OF
le legislature of that state substantially Is
lacted the statute OF James L, death y
spalty included, because, SIS cited in y
10 preamble, sit hath been doubted y