Salt Lake evening Democrat. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1885-1887, 1885-10-06
A BAGATELLE.


man passions. 1t is almost safe TO say
that within the limits OF the entire Terri
tory there is not an undrejudiced, Impair
tal man who can look upon the vexed
and vexing Utah problem with a clear,
dispassionate eye, and truthfully, and
honestly, and justly weigh the pros and
cons OF the question, and give to each its
just due. No question was ever without
its two sides; there were ever radicals
and extremists who were never once
wrong; and Utah is filled with radicals
and extremists. On the one hand we
have religious bigotry and fanaticism not
without their compound of hypocrisy;
while on the other side there is zeal for
the enforcement of the law which deems
the end to be accomplished the greatest
ever to be compassed; and this zeal is
not without its religious bigotry
and fanaticism, and perhaps tinge
OF hypocrisy. Such are the two
sides which this question in Utah
presents; and the two sides that we have
conceived of the case and put forth as
correct may be entirely erroneous and
prompted by prejudice. In storm, no
man who feels its force is IA fit judge to
determine all its causes nor to indicate its
and we all more or less feel its fury. Are
the clouds on Utah's horizon thickening
or beginning to break? Ii Il light is to
shine from behind the black heavens,
one in the wilderness is heard crying,
"Prepare ye the way" for whom is the
sound sent? These are questions which
all are asking; yet these are questions
which none are answering.
1t is impossible to avoid such reflections
rs one surveys the political field in Utah
and wonders when the strife will cease,
when the rest will come. All who have
given the matter any thought feel that n
crisis is near at hand that things have
reached that stage when there must
be q determination OF the rights of
authority in Utah. The events OF last
week and yesterday in the courts show a
new phase OF the question. Two promi-
nent Mormons, in obedience to the desire
of their hearts, and for the interest and
benefit OF their families, promised to obey
the Edmunds law in the future. Against
these two gentlemen lit is needless to
name them, rs all know their names),
there were hurled an athemas and personal
abuse ;-they were yiterperated and Will
fed; in fact all that religious bigo try or
fawning hypocrisy and low instincts
could do to disgrace these men or CRAFTY
base feelings OF revenge, was done; and
it was done by those who heretofore
had extended to them the hand OF fellow
ship and greeted them as brothers. This
was done to these two men by the Nor
mon press and the Mermon people. Such
bitter and unjustifable abuse was natur-
ally source OF sorrow to these two men
but that was not the worst effect. Its
worst effect was the intimidation it pro-
duced among those who were under in
dictment for the same offense as these
two men referred to above. Some
men were very strongly inclined tc
promise obedience to the law in future,
but were frightened from carrying theil
inclination into action on account OF the
storm which such action would raise
around their heads. The fear OF that
storm was far greater than the fear OF six
months Imprisonment and fine OF three
hundred dollars. Why did these mer
prefer punishment TO promising obedience
to the law? They preferred punishment
because the punishment for the offenst
OF unlawful cohabitation is Il mere baga
telle. To their minds it was punishment
in either case, and they chose that which
to them seemed the least. 1t plainly
shows that the fear OF the law-breakeri
is greater than the fear of the law; and
for such condition of things there SHOULD
be a remedy. Let it be impressed upoi
the mind that those who are now suffer
ing Imprisonment for violating the Law
against unlawful cohabitation deem sucl
punishment mere bagatelle. If thu
present punishment is to be the extent o
the punishmentfor unlawful cohabitaton
il is certain that OF the number VIII,
are indicted and arraigned under tn,
Edmunds law there will be few I,
promise obedience to the law in future
They doubt very much whether indict
ment for their oifense can be found unde
the continuing crime construction of tn
cohabitation clause OF the Edmunds Act
Even now they are apxiously waiting +
see il some OF those who are now under
going punishment for unlawful cohabita
ton will be re-indicted. 1t is this belle
that no new indictments will be foun
against those now suffering punishment
that lends hope TO many and makes MAJ
tyrs OF those who would think twice be
fore they chose to obey their church i
preference to the law.
What is the remedy for this? 1t is thi,
and will prove most effectual ii tried
Make the punishment for unlawful CO
habitation co-extensiye with that fC
polygamy abolish the statute of limit
tons so tar as polygamy and unlawfl
cohabitation are concerned; enact ma
riage law making it unlawful for any mir
lister to solemnize the marriage ceremon,
unless the parties desiring such religion
sOlemniZatiOn nresant tha ,,.,,;,,,o, Co.,,