Salt Lake evening Democrat. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1885-1887, 1885-10-23
aTHE SHIELD OF FAITH.

ram is OUT. LII Is Hue eStlIlS dIiu 6crfco
as record of all who have been
convicted of polygamy and unlawful
cohabitation. and defines the status of
each in regard to obeying the law in fu-
ture There is absent one name from
those who promised to obey the Edmunds
law-the one whose name is absent is
Mr.. G. V. Spencer. This may very aptly
be called the roll of honor, and people
will select the ones to place in that roll
according to their ideas of what is honor
and what is not. This Shield of Faith
shows one thing very plainly, which is
that those who have declined to promise
obedience to the law are far more numer
GUS than those who have promised to
obey it.
The Edmunds law was passed to ac-
complish a particular object, which object
was the suppression of polygamy. For
this purpose that law imposed certain
punishment for forming polygamous
marriage, and another punishment for
the continuance of the relationship after
it was formed Very few convictions
have been had for the crime of polygamy
since the passage of that law, but there
has been quite number of convictions
for unlawful cohabitation. The reason
for this is that in the one instance it is
almost impossible to get any evidence of
the marriage, while in the other it is not
SO difficult The convictions for unlaw-
full cohabitation being frequent, il may be
asked how it is that apparently there is
no'inclination on the part OF the polyg-
amists to discontinue the practice of un-
lawful cohabition. For this condition of
things many reasons may be assigned, land
among the true reasons will be found the
following ones. Those who are in polyg-
amy believe that the Government will
get tired of prosecuting the violators of
the Edmunds law, if those violators but
hold out long enough. Their experience
of enforcing the anti-polygamy law by the
Government in the past gives consider
able justification to their view of the pres
ent effort to vindicate the law. Then
again these same violators of the law re-
ceive great deal of sympathy from their
co-religinists who are not liable to prose-
cution, and this sympathy gives to these
violators of the law much hope and con-
siderable strength to bear the penalties
imposed upon them for the violation of
the law. Another reason that may be
assigned for the defiant attitude of those
who go to jail in preference to promising
to obey the law, is that the punishment
imposed upon them is comparatively
light; and knowing the. character
of evidence required to secure convic-
ton for unlawful cohabitation, upon their
release from prison it is their determine
ton to avoid any course of conduct or the
making of any remark that can by any
means be construed into evidence of CO.
habitation with plural wives. Their posi-
ton in this regard can be best illustrated
by the story of the Irishman. "Pat,"
said the judge, ~ sincerely hope that as
this is your first offense, you will never
be caught stealing again" 'sYour Honor,
l join you in the hope that won't be
caught stealing again.
Another reason why those who are in
prison now for breaking the Edmunds
law will not be reformed, is that
they are all associated together, and
being together, they naturally discuss
the reasons for their confinement, and in
their discussions come to the conclusion
that they are being prosecuted and are
real martyrs. This is naturally the case
with all men who are associated in con-
finement, and to so associate men is the
surest way in the world to confirm them
in their crimes or errors. This is the
defect in the prison system in Utah, and
not of any law
To see the evil which pervades the Ter
ritory and to understand many of the
reasons for its continuance, is one thing.
but to suggest its cure is quite another,
and one far more difficult. If the forma-
ton of polygamous marriage is to be
punished as a crime in those entering in
to the relationship, then those perform
ing the ceremony creating such polygam-
GUS relationship should be punished
equally with those entering into such pro-
hibited marriage. The polygamous mar
riage is punished as being inconsistent
with the unit of the State, which is the
family upon the monogamic system. If
the formation of such a marriage is pro- |
hibited and heavily punished when
formed, then the same reasons exist for
prohibiting the continuance of such
illegal relationship after its formation as
for prohibiting its formation. This being
the case, why should not the continuation
of the relationship be punished to the
same extent that its formation is? Make
the punishment for unlawful cohabita-
ton co-extensive with that for polygamy.
as a first and indispensable step. There
are others to be taken, but none of them
should be backward from the progress
that has been made. Another thing that |
should be done is to abolish the statute |
of limitations SO far as polygamy and un-
lawful cohabitation are concerned or, at |
least, extend the time in which these
crimes may be barred to such length
that the statute cannot be so easily lived
down as now. But all these things may
be done and still very little viii be ac-
complished towards yindicating the laws