The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1884-01-27
SALT LAKE DAILY HERALD,
s. Polygamy in Utah.
Z. Public schools.
8. The revision Of the tariff.
q Mobilization NJ tha intarnAl r..

We AoAy8ohy ~ SseAs
z. Public schools.
8. The revision Of the tariff.
9. Modification Of the internal re-
venue laws. .
The Times il invited by the pro-
jeotor to give its particular admire
ton to the section on polygsmy, set
ting forth what it 10 necessary for
government to do about it in order
to assure the present and future wei
fare of our country.
II is alleged that this abomination
has grown to dangerous proper.
tions;;" that there are about 1900. 600
polygamists;" that they disregard the
law and defy the national authority;
that the conflict between the alleged
zoo, 900 polygamists and the (prob-
ably) 5000, 900 OF the Americans
that are not polsgamists sis no less
ilrepressible than was the question
Of freedom" and that "we must
choose the one or the other" Hsv-
ing predicated these things the pro-
gramme informs US what it is neces-
sary for the regulative agency OF our
country to do.
When one travels in An unknown
wilderness, it is comforting to feel
that one has 81 trustworthy and safe
guide. But in this Mormon wilder
LESS. in spite of the goodness of the
guide, one meets with stumbling
blocks. The danger that the trained
eye OF the guide discerns in the al
legged proportion OF 200, 600 polygam-
lists to IS, 900, 900 other people is no.
readily discovered by the inexper-
fenced faculty. Besides. the state
ment of the guide that there are
"about 200. 900 polygamists" in Utah
and the adjacent provinces is not
true. The commissioners appointed
by the President to execute the "Ed-
munds acts failed to discover ten
thousand polygamists. men and
women, in Utah. There may be, per-
haps. 200 600 professors of the Nor
mon religion; but ii ia a safe assertion
that there are not ten thousand prac-
sioing polygamists in the whole lot.
1t is doubtful il there are 200, 600
polygamists in the county, even in
Guiding all those outside of the Nor.
mon sanctuary. There may be that
number, perhaps a much greater
number, that have no beliefs, convic.
lions, or principles hostile to polyg-
amy; but polygamy is not a belief; it
is practice. Among the Mormons
in Utah it is practised more or less
openly. under fhe pretended sanction
of a pretended revelation from the
supreme ruler OF the universe. In
other paris OF the country, among
people that do not subscribe to the
Mormon dogmstism, it is prRcticed
more or less secretly. without any re-
gard to the edicts OF the supreme
ruler Of the universe, or any other
ruler. Still, it is very doubtfal if
there are 100000 polygamists in the
whole population in this country.
The law (meaning the human
law Of this country declares polyg-
amy to be crime, and sanctions Sc
we're punishment of all persons that
commit that crime. ibis is the law
in Utah no less than in Michigan, or
in Illinois. In Michigan. the execu-
ton Of this law occasionally is deemed
sufficient to prevent polygamy from
attaining dangerous proportions.
Why would not DE the same the case
in Utah? There is in Utah a civil
government, appointed by the
President, that pretends to be- az
hostile to the crime Of polygamy as
the civil government of Michigan is;
and yet, the law iorbidding and pro-
viding 10. the punishment of polyg-
amy has been executed by the civil
government in Utah only once ip
twenty-five years. II it had
been executed oftener. about
once years. it probable that any
JEALOUS promoter of the present and
fnture welfare of our country would
'eel warranted in saying that the
proportions of the crime in Utah are
more dangerous than in Michigan, or
sven so dangerous as in Indiana; OK
hat be would discover between the
much married and the not much |
married sections of society" conflict
10 less irrepressible than that
between freedom and slavery?"
Why don't the anti-polygamist
OF Utah execute the law
'gains! polygamy occasionally? This
8 the only question Of any import.
noe there is in the "polygamy prob.
en-" There is no call but that Of ar
ant demagogism or sentimental
oily to lug in any other. -Editerial
q Chicago Times.