National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1885-08-21
The Majority Must Rule.

a correspondent who was formerly a
lawyer, but is now popular preacher OF
the gospel, writes:
fear THE REPUBLICAN is getting Off the
track. In your issue of Aug 10 you say "it is
not worth while to go into any discussion of
he.rcsults Of poiygamy as compared with
monogamy. If could be demonstrated that
the patriarchal way was better than the mod
ern way, the demonstration would be ire
lcvant." Docs not this imply possibility OF
demonstrating that polygamy is better than
monogamy? And, If such demonstration
were possible, would 1t be irrelevant Would
1t b. right to enforce the anti.polygamy law
If the Mormons were to prove the superior ex-
ccllence of the patriarchal system?
THE REPUBLICAN has not undertaken to
decide, either directly or by implication,
whether or not It is possible to show that
polygamy is better than monogamy. That
question is not before the country nor Is It
likely to he, however loudly and repeatedly
the saints may assert that their peculiar
institution is divine and that its results COM
mend it to general approval and adoption.
"If such a demonstration were possible"
it certainly would be irrelevant at this tmo,
GERS whose duty II is to enforce laws have
nothing at all to do with the reasons why
such laws were enacted. The Mormons
have proved to their own satisfaction "the
superior excellence Of the patriarchal sys-
tCm," but that does not help their case in
the slightest degree. And If they could con
vince all the federal officers in Utah that
they are right and the law wrong, it would
still be the duty Of those officers to 90 right
OH with the enforcement Of the law, or to
resign their places Immediately.
Ours is government Of public opinion.
The theory of our republic is that the ma
iority is right. When public opinion has
been put into the shape of legal enact
ments, by order of the majority, the mi
pority must submit, unless they prefer to
take the chances of rebellion. That resor
is always open, and it would be more cred
liable to the polygamous Mormons to take
the field in armed opposition to the federal
authority than 1t is to use the mysterious
and tremendous power of the church as
they are now doing.
If the Mormons were In the majority in
this country, and were able to control leg
islation, they could legalize their polyga-
nous custom. In that case monogamists
would have no remedy but rebellion.
OF course there is no danger of
such a change. We put it merely
as hypothetical case. The sentiment of
Europe and America favors monogamy.
Christian civilization is its main pillar.
| Hebrews and freethinkers are Its unilnch-
ing adherents. The Mormons are alone in
their delusion, and their institution is a
social ulcer.
Another correspondent is inclined to
sympathize with the Mormons because, he
says, "polygamy is a matter of conscience
with them. 1t is their religious belief, and
they should not, therefore, be treated as
common felons."
In reply to this we have only to repeat
that public sentiment, crystalliZed into law,
must have its way. There is no such thing
as absolute freedom under our own or any
other system of civilized government. No
man has any more liberty than is consistent
with the welfare of the community So
ciety claims and exercises the right TO
take public property for private uses. 1t
runs a railroad through your family burial
ground, orit builds a Jail in your front yard.
| 1t RACES your dwelling, 1t puts you and
your sons in line Of battle TO be shot at,
and, If you disObey its mandates as written
in the statutes, 1t shuts you up in prison or
even chokes you TO death at the end of n
pendant rope. This is regulated liberty.
One Of the regulations Of liberty In this
hat my lie nj m