Salt Lake evening Democrat. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1885-1887, 1885-11-14
BOUNCED FROM THE BAR
Judge Zaue Renders an Opinion In
the Disbarrment Case Of
Aurelius Miner.
An Ethical Discourse on Polygamy and
Unlawful Colabltation.
Moral Turpitude Is Involved, and the
Erudite Aurelius's Occupation
Is Gone.

! In the Third Judicial District Court, Utah
Territory, Salt Lake county.
In the matter OF the citation OF Aurelius
Miner to show cause, etc.
At the present term of this Court,
Aurelius Miner, an attorney and COUNSEL
lor-at-law thereof, was convicted of the
crime of unlawful cohabitation and sem
fenced to imprisonment in the Pcniten-
tiary for the term OF six months and to
pay fine of three hundred dollars and
the costs OF prosecution. Before judy
ment he was asked by the Court il it was
his intention in the future to obey the
lygamy and unlawful cohabitation, and
not to advise other persons to break them;
to which he answered that since his ma
iority he had never said that he would
obey all the laws OF Congress. When
reminded OF the obligations Of his
oath as an attorney, he answered that he
was admitted to practice law before the
Act referred to took effect; that he took
an oath to support the Constitution of the
United States; that since he had reached
his majority there had been laws OF the
United States in force which he had
said publicly that he would not obey,
and that there were other laws in
force before his time which probably
he would not have obeyed had he
lived during the time they were in force
that he was ready to obey all constitu-
tional laws, that he differed from the
courts as to the validity of the law against
polygamy and unlawful cohabitation, that
when law reaches into the domain OF
morals he had right to differ. When
further reminded that the Supreme Court
of the United States, the tribunal OF
final appeal provided by the Constitution
Of the United States, has repeatedly af-
firmed the statute against polygamy and
unlawful cohabitation to be valid and
and binding upon every person within
their jurisdiction, he answered that he
had said from his childhood, in the lam
guage OF Solomon, "to fear God and keep
His commandments is the whole duty OF
man." that he reserved the right to de-
termine for himself the constitutionality
and the validity of the law in question.
A certified copy OF the trial and con-
, viction of the respondent and copy of
the questions by the Court and the an
swers of the attorney, transcribed by the
official reporter, were filed in the Court
and constitute the accusation. The
record shows the conviction of the ac-
cused, and in view of the questions put
to the defendant and of the circumstances
answers authorized the inference that he
did not intend to obey in the future the
law that he had violated in the
past. Under the circumstances the
Court entered Il rule against the accused
and cited him to appear on u day named
and show cause why his name should not
be stricken from the roll OF attorneys and
councillors OF the Court. On the day
named he appeared in person and by
counsel, but made no answer otherwise
} than by oral argument Counsel also APP
peared ut the instance and on behalf of
the Bar Association OF Salt Lake City and
insisted OH the accusation and on the dis
barrment of the accused.
The Statutes OF the Territory OF Utah
relating to the matter in hand so far as il
! is necessary to refer to them are as fol-
l lows: The first subdivision of Section l54
page $50, Laws of 1884, provides that an
attorney and counsellor-at-law may be
removed and suspended by the Supreme
Court and by the District Courts, LIST
upon his conviction OF felony or INSIDE
meanor involving moral turpitude, in
which case the record of conviction is
Y conclusive evidence" I'd, upon "any VIC
lation of the oath taken by him or OF his
, duties as such attorney and counsellor. >
: The first clause OF Section IA, page LIS
: Ibid, provides SIT is the duty of an at
torney and counsellor, LIST, to support the
. Constitution and the laws of the United
States and OF this Territory" Section
) 156, page 1871 Ibid. is as follows: "ThC
j proceedings to remove or suspend an at
5 torney and counsellor under the first sub
, division OF section 154 must be taken b,
the Court on the receipt of certified
copy of the record of conviction
NV
a division OF the last-named section NAV be
. taken by the Court for matters within it
!. knowledge, or may be taken upon the in
formation of another.
In view OF the facts and the law, tn,
question arises, should the name of thu
n accused be stricken from the roll of at
torneys and counsellers OF this court? l
the crime OF unlawful cohabitation in
wolves moral turpitude, his conviction O
itself is sufficient cause. This presents
y the further question, is the conduct which
Il constitutes the crime immoral? Ii mar
g lives with two or more women i'm the
Ii habit and repute OF marriage such con
duct constitutes the crime of unlawful co
habtation. The effects OF the crime upor
society are essentially the same as those
OF polygamy. A man who has lawful
wife living commits the latter offense
. when he formally marries another WON,
/. an, and he commits the former offense
' when he associates with two or more
! women as their husband, or apparentl,
: rs such husband. Both crimes usually
. exist together in. this Territory, although
prosecution for polygamy is often barred
by the statute OF limitations. Assuming
then, that both crimes are essentially the
same from the standpoint of morals, in
asmuch as the definition OF polygamy is
Z. more simple and better understood, j
s will consider that crime from mora
R point of view.
: First assert that the moral sense OF
the civilized world has condemned polyg.
D amy rs wrongful and immoral.
. Second--I assert that polygamy violates
r well-settled moral principles. Knowing
: that the various ethical schools may diff
Y fer in some respects, and that individuals
NAV differ as to the extent OF moral tur.
! pitude involved in this crime, will point
ont certain well-settled moral rules OF
tests which this crime violates, and which
| show that il is grossly immoral While
r moral philosophers differ as to the source
f, OF ethical rules, they do not disagree as tc
i their existence or as to their application
and binding effect upon human conduct
While one school OF ethics asserts that
I moral truths are expressions OF the Divine
: will revealed in sacred writings or in the
human conscience, and another school
= makes state enactments the source OF
4 right and wrong, and u third believe that
= man is endowed with an innate sense by
which to determine right and wrong, and
Al.