Salt Lake evening Democrat. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1885-1887, 1885-10-08

we said:
That the Mormon church is each day TAX
ing to itself more powers ana privileges tuali
its members have, is plain to all who VIII put
observe. 1t is fast reaching that stage wnen
rights and privileges are claimed to belong
to the church in contradistinction TO mem,
hers thereof, and at future time we shall
undertake to prove that IT IS doctrine ol
the Mormon church that the right to practice
polygamy does not inhere in the lndivldua,
as n citizen but rather in the church, and
that it confers the right upon or withholdslt
from its members at its discretion. Inc
Mormon church ignores the fact that the
Constitution guarantees religlous nDerty 70
the individual and assumes that the guaranty
is to the church in its corporate capacity.
We desire especially to call attention
to that portion of the above extract which
says: "At future time we shall under
take to prove that it is n doctrine OF the
Mormon church that the right to practice
polygamy does not inhere in the individ-
ual as a citizen but rather in the church,
and that it confers the right upon or
withholds il from its members at its dis
cretion." We propose to prove that
proposition this evening, not by argu-
ment and long train OF resoning, but by
authority, and that authority the Presi-
dent of the Mormon church and mis- First
Councillor.
Mr.. Taylor, as President of the Nor
mon church, and Mr.. Cannon as his
First Councillor and an Apostle OF the
Mormon church, have just addressed an
epistle to the "Ofiicers and Members OF the
Church OF Jesus Christ Of Latter-day
Saints now assembled mt conference in
Logan. The epistle is addressed from
Salt Lake City under date of October
9th, 1885 1t goes over the entire situa-
ton in Utah, and discusses the constitu-
tionality of the Edmunds law and the
proceedings Hereunder. 1t naturally
speaks of the doctrine and practice OF
polygamy, and it clearly and definitely
defines the right to practice it. The
cpistle says:
1t should also be understood that the prac-
tice is not generally admissible even among
the Latter-day Saints. 1t is strictly guarded,
the intention being to allow only those who
are above reproach to enter into the rela-
tionship. The practice of the doctrine is
not for extension beyond the church, and is
even limited within its pale.
We ask every reader TO carefully COM
pare this extract from this new epistle
with the extract from our editorial of the
22d ult. and see il ii is not an absolute
confirmation OF our proposition. The
constitutional right to prac tice polygamy,
then, can only be allowed those who are
"above reproach," and the power to say
who are and who are not above reproach
belongs to the Mormon church. Con-
slider that proposition for moment; Il
constitutional right can only be exercised
through the sanction OF the Mormon
church. Was anything more preposter-
Gus, and in direct antagonism to the very
genius OF the American,Government, ever
heard of? Every war that was ever
waged for the preservation OF rights, has
been waged for the preservation of indi-
vidual rights as against the encroach-
ments and aggressions OF associated
bodies. The English Revolution was
waged for the preservation OF the rights OF
English freemen, and John Hampden re-
fused to pay his eighteen shilllings
ship money because it was an
invasion OF his individual rights.
Cromwell fought for individual rights
against the aggressions OF the king who,
at the time, was substantially the gov
ernment. The Declaration of Independ
ence was a declaration OF the rights o
the individual man; the American Reyo
luton was fought to maintain them, and
the Constitution OF the United States was
formulated and adopted for their preser
walton. The French Revolution was
fought to establish the rights OF the indi
vidual. The English Bill OF Rights ant
every Bill OF Rights OF every State in the
American Union is but II sacred and re
cognized declaration OF the rights OF tn,
individual. And yet the Mormon churcl
says that the right to practice polygamy
is a religious right and one guaranteed BY
the Constitution, but one that sis strictl,
guarded, the intention being to allow onl,
those who are above reproach TO en-
ter into the relation ship" When die
it became necessary to place additiona
safeguards around a constitutional righ
different from those contained in the
Constitution itself and the laws made il
pursuance thereof? And when was tn,
Mormon church made the guardian ant
dispenser OF the rights OF American
citizens which are guaranteed by the Con
stitution? The Mormon church has al
ways insisted upon the right to practic
polygamy rs one guaranteed by the frs
amendment OF the Constitution, yet OF
the sixth OF October in the year OF ou
Lord eighteen hundred and cighty-fiye
the Mormon church authortivel
declares TO its members and tn
world that II constitutional right
the right TO ''the practice Of the doctria
is not for extension bey0nd he churci
and is eoen limited Withm lis PATE.
A constitutional right has become
privilege bestowed at the pleasure OF tn
Mormon church. Such doctrine mus
make Marshall and fancy turn in the
graves. Let all remember that the Mo
mons claim that right guaranteed by til
Consultation, sis not for extension beyon
the church, and even limited within i
pale"
-
DIPHrIIERIA AND QUARANTINE