Salt Lake evening Democrat. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1885-1887, 1885-11-04
A FINAL DECISION.

n HdSfllISJOu uiSpdCCll W 1ilS 1Icf fu1t
saws that the case Of Angus M. Cannon
has been advanced on the calendar, and
will be heard by the Supreme Court on
Monday, the 10th inst. This decision will
put at rest the question whether or not
the construction put upon the famous
cohabitation clause of the Edmunds Act
by our local courts is correct.
The Edmunds law was enacted for a
special purpose, and to further this pur-
pose the unlawful cohabitation clause
thereof was inserted. The term, "un-
lawful cohabitation, was susceptible
of various interpretations in ac-
cordance with the different phases
of crime to which it might be
applied. The general Interpretation put
upon it in ordinary use was that it meant
lewd cohabitation between all parties,
without reference to the previous relation
ship of the parties guilty of the crime.
This Interpretation was not adopted by
the Third District Court, nor afterwards
by the Supreme Court of the Territory.
The construction OF the Third District
Court was that the term unlawful CO.
habitation" must be construed in accord
ance with the general object for which
the Edmunds Act was passed, and this
being the case, the Court, in constituting
the law, was bound to take cognizance of
the relationship of parties prior to their
trial for unlawful cohabitation In other
words, the Act must be construed as
whole and not separately. With this
view of how the Act was to be con-
strued, the cohabitation clause thereof
was interpreted as meaning continua
ton of the polygamous marriage relation
without any reference to the question of
carnal knowledge. II is to test the cor
rectness of this construction of the cohabi- |
tation clause of the Edmunds Act that
Angus M. Cannon has appealed to the
Supreme Court of the United States; and
it being criminal case, the Supreme
Court has advanced it on the calendar.
What the decision of the Supreme Court |
will be it is impossible to say, but the
general impression among members of |
the bar is, we believe, that the construction |
OF the local courts will be sustained; and
this is our own opinion. If that construc-
ton is declared to be wrong, it is quite |
certain that new act having the same
object in view that the Edmunds law, as
construed by Judge Zane, had, will be
passed by Congress this winter, with ad-
ditional clauses and heavier penalties.
The possibility that the construction of
the cohabitation clause of the Edmunds
Act given by the local courts may be de-
clared wrong, brings us to the considera-
ton of an important matter No one
whose opinion is entitled to any consider
alton doubts for moment but that the
Government is in earnest in its endeavors
% suppress polygamy. The condition of
hings in Utah is anomalous, and one
hat is entirely new in the catalogue of |
political problems. The condition of ,
hings in Utah is consequent upon the
and largely successful attempt
o introduce system of marriage that is {
1t variance with all modern civilized ideas !
'f marriage and the family, and one that
s entirely Oriental in its origin and t
practice. That system threatens the c
system of marriage, and G
that, invites the civiliza- q
ion of polygamous countries. which is u
'arbarism and despotism combined. Much t
egislation has been passed upon this
natter ,and the probabilities are that much
aore will be. A great fault with much of
has been that it has failed to define the
rimes in the act Ii the Edmunds Act u
ad defined the meaning of unlawful CO. Z
abitation as usedin that Act, there would =
ave been no chance for misconstruc-
on OF it. Future legislation as to polyg- I"
my should define all the things meant -
} be made crimes the same as a criminal =.
'de does. The practice of polygamy is a. !,
cry apt to assume various shapes, and it ~ "
lould be met and punished in these ', =,
lapes, but to know them they must be o
efined We trust this will be done in "
ture legislation for Utah. ~