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


tial man who can look upon the veXed
and vexing Utah problem with 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 a fit Judge to
determine all its causes nor to indicate its
course. In Utah, we are all in storm,
and we all more or less feel its fury. Are
the clouds on Utah's horizon thickening
or beginning to break? If light is to
shine from behind the black heavens,
from whom will it be? If the voice of
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
as 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
crisis is near at hand; that things have
reached that stage when there must
be a 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 it is needless to
name them, as all know their names),
there were hurled an athemas and personal
abuse; they were viterperated and Will
fed; in fact all that religious bigo try or
tawning 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 a source of sorrow to these two mer
but that was not the worst effect It's
worst effect was the intimidation If nro-
duced among those who Wcrre under in
dictment for the same offanse as those
two men referrsh to above. Some
iiio" were NeIyS strongly inclined to
proiiiise peGgience to the law in future,
ous were frightened from carrying their
iiiciiiis li9sSion into action on account OF the
'VoI9n 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 men
prefer punishment to promising obedience
to the law? They preferred punishment
because the punishment for the offense
of unlawful cohabitation is 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-breakers
is greater than the fear of the law: and
for such condition OF things there should
be remedy. Let it be impressed upon [
the mind that those who are now suffer [
ing imprisonment for violating the law {
against unlawful cohabitation deem such I
mere bagatelle. If the [
present punishment is to be the extent of t
the punishment for unlawful cohabitation. i,
it is certain that of the number who |
are indicted and arraigned under the 3,
Edmunds law there will be few to ;
promise obedience to the law in future. S
They doubt very much whether indict- ,
ment Tor their offense can be found under /
The continuing crime construction of the q
clause of the Edmunds Act. a
Even now they are anxiously waiting to /
see If some OF those who are now under t
going punishment for unlawful eohabita- t
ion will be re-indicted. II is this belief @
hat no new indictments will be found i
against those now suffering punishment I
hat lends hope to many and makes mar U
yrs of those who would think twice be- |:
ore they chose to obey their church in r
preference TO the law. f.
What is the remedy for this? II istbis a
ind viii prove most efectual if tried. c
Make the punishment for unlawful CO. @
labitation co-eXtensive with that for n
'olygamy; abolish the statute of limita-
ions so far as polygamy and unlawful g
are concerned; enact mar Ii
lage law making it unlawful for any min c
ster to solemnize the marriage ceremony,
Unless the parties desiring such religious T
present the marriage certi- a
cate OF the authorized civil magistrate; o
nact registry law for births, and where W
he paternity of child is not known. N
nake such child the ward of the State b
fter the age of infancy, and during in b
lncy to certain extent, and register the Vi
anne of such nallius .flius in record W
-hich shall be omen to nnhlic in p