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

A Washington dispatch to the Herald
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
special purpose, and to further this pur-
pose the unlawful cohabitation clause
thereof was inserted. The term, Gun
lawful cohabitaton," 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.
habitaton" 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 a
whole and not separately. With this
view of how the Act was to be con-
strued, the cohabitation clause thereof
was interpreted rs meaning continue
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
tion 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
to suppress polygamy. The condition o
things in Utah is anomalous, and one
that is entirely new in the catalogue o
political problems. The condition o
things in Utah is consequent upon tht
widespread and largely successful attemp
W lntTOuuCe " SyStcIl Vi IiaTTluRc titI u
at variance with all modern civilized idea
of marriage and the family, and one tina
is entirely Oriental in its origin ant
practice. That system threatens thu
monogamic system of marriage, ant
threatening that, invites the civiliza
ton of polygamous countries, which i
barbarism and despotism combined. Mucl
legislation has been passed upon thi
matter, and the probabilities are that mucl
more will be. A great fault with much c
it has been that it has failed to define tn
crimes in the act. Ii the Edmunds Ac
had defined the meaning Of unlawful &C
habitation as used in that Act, there woul
have been no chance for misconstruc
ton OF it. Future legislation as to polyl
amy should define all the things mean
to be made crimes the same as crimini
code does. The practice OF polygamy
very apt to assume various shapes, and
should be met and punished in thes
shapes, but to know them they must b
defined. We trust this will be done i
future legislation for Utah.
A NEW COMMENTARY.