The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1885-10-10
Mr.. RICH RETURNS.
With More eli the Obeying of the
Law.
To the Editor of THE HERALD.

To the Editor of THE HERALD
well, suppose that law should be re-
peaIed?"
This question was asked by defend
ant who stood before Judge Zane, on
Tuesday last. From the context of this
DEFENDANTS remarks, it is fair to pre-
sumo that if the law were repealed he
would feel it his duty to create anew
his polygamous relations, and then,
under the sacred promises which must
of necessity attend such unions, and
under the scanctity of the unchanging
and eternal command he could win and
wear some other trusting heart until
new edict of human law should make it
polite for him to cast away that tender
heart, torn and bleeding. Do not this
person and the class of persons of which
he has chosen TO make himself repre-
sentative, in their alleged effort to obey
conscience, merely pay homage TO ex-
.pedIency?
i.
den and violent regard for the law for
bidding the practice of plural marri-
age? 4 man who now renOunces-de-
spite your protest, Mr.. Editor, / cannot
used any other word-his polygamOus
relations, and with these relations, one
or more of his wives, thinks, apparent
/ ", that he is offering ample defense
when he SAYS that his reverence for law
] ~ mil
/ than one wife Why did not such a
man show his sincerity by this renun-
citation IN 1862? or. If he were not then
in practice OF pOlygamy, why did he
ever enter into that relation? 1t is not
! the energy with which a law is enforced
which should make it sacred to the
/ citizen. And, therefore, if a man has
lived for years in persistent violation OF
! the act OF 1862, he cannot now take any
honor to himself for his tardy and COM
pulsOry obedience 10 the Edmunds law
of 1882. Such a person may say that
he was actuated by conscience. Other
people must not be deemed too harsh if
they call his motive cOwardice.
am not writing as the advocate or
apologist of law-breakers. recognize,
hope as clearly as any other, the re-
spect which every citizen owes to the
Z
try. Merely, lay down these PROPOSE
tons: That if a man violated the pro-
visions of the act of 1862, in obedience
to direct command from Almighty
God, he had no more right to withdraw,
at the mandate of q court, from the
revelations enforced by that command,
than he would have to commit murder -,
or perjury in answer to human require
menJ. And that if he tranSg-essed the
law of 1862, without such divine call,
he was not only a wretched betrayer of
confding women and the luStful wrong
er of unborn children, but he was trai =
Orous to the best government ever il
stituted by mankind.
There are a few questions which / be-
lieve the young men of Utah would like
t. have answered by any man who ac-
cepts of Justice Zane's amnesty. Those
questions are as follows:
Did you enter into your pOlygamOus
relations in obedience to the require
ments from Almighty God? If you
did, why in the name of all that is
eternal and holy, do you renounce those
relations ?"
Did you lie when you taught the
women who have been your wives to
believe that the doctrine of plural mar
rage was of divine origin? If you did
thus lie, what do you call yourself? and
what do you expect your unfortunate
children to call you when history shall
place the record of your conduct side
by side with that Of Hyrum B. Claw
SOM"
Mr. Editor, you and others deem my
remarks harsh and impertinent. Icare
not. This IS no time for cringing
opinions and honied words However
lmperfectly I may write, this matter is
of vital interest to the young people OF
the Latter day Saints.
Yours respectfully,
Ben Z. RICH
OGDEN, Oct. 5, 1885.