The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1886-10-10
WHY THEY WERE NOT REsPEcrED

WHY THEY WERE NOT RESPECTED.
In making his speech in the Arnold
case recently, Pros cutting Attorney
Dickson said theIaws against polygamy
and unlawful cohabitstion have never
been respected in this Territory. No
sane person could even hope, under all
the circumstances, that they would be.
In the first place the subject on which
Congress enacted the laws properly be-
lOnged to the domain assigned to the
Territorial government. But those
measures which the people here con-
sidered impolitic and destructive of
their peace and society, and therefore
refused to enact into laws, Congress
proceeds to place upon our statute
book, and rigidly tries to enforce them
IN the community in spite of
their solemn protest. And then the
Prosecuting Attorney complains that
the laws which the people have ever re-
garded as hurtful to their interests, and
infamous to the last degree are not
resp cted He need never hope to see
them respected so long as the people
believe that they are uni st, cruel and
oppressive. Those laws come to the
people with . foreign aspect; they
know they were enacted by Congress
nndeT the pressure Of a manufactured
popular sentiment against the people
where they we're intended to operate;
they know that they emanated from the
brains of the anti Mormon carpet
baggerS of Utah, whose ambition IS to
capture IN some way or other, the local
government of Utah, and live upon the
spoiis of their conquest; they know the
laws are administered by men who are
no. of their own choosing, and who are
IN no way responsible to them for their
conduct, and whose actions, as we'll as
their words, proclaim them the avowed
enemies of the people-under all these
considerations, is it any wonder that
the anti-polygamy laws are not res
pected?
Moreover. no man could respect the
anti-pQlygamy laws as they are inter
preted by the Federal courts here-for
which Interpretation Mr.. Dickson him
self is largely responsible-unless he
can respect the most inhuman cru
city; for according to Mr.. Dickson
a man who through his religious con-
victiOns las espoused more than one
wife must in the most public manner
repudiate that relationship, and secure
and file a decree of the. court declaring
the statues of the man to his wives.
Not that this could alter the relation
ship Of the parties, but that the most
public casting away of women whom
he had married in good faith as his
wives might take place, without any
regard whatever for the feelings of the
women to be turned adrift. 1t is but
fair to say, however. that the court has
not yet decided that his fling the de-
cree business is necessary, but main
tains thst the public promise to live
within the law is sufficient. But in both
requirements q casting of of women
who have In many instances
occupied the honorable station Of wife
for years, is involved. And then the
conduct reouired OF men, according to
Mr.. Diekson's notions SIS developed in
the Arnold case, wherein he said in
substance thas the defendant need not
have taken the carriage himself to
sake one of his sick children together
With its mother out for q ride, under
the advice of Rhy sioisn. Ar. Dickson
said the defendant could have "sent
she carriage" And this is the idea that
Attorney Dickson has of the require
meDts of the snti-polygamy lawsl And
then he complains that the laws on
that subject are not respected in Utah
We pity the man who can respect such
laws, aud especially when such inter
pretstioRs are given TO them as At
torney Dickson would fasten upon
them. If anything could convert as
20 belief in the doctrine of total de-
prav1ty as taught by some sects Of
Christendom, it would be to hear that
men respected the snti-polygamy laws
as interpreted by the Federal Courts of
Utah, and especially by Attorney Dick
son