National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1886-05-15

charter or to mCdify IL. IL does not seem TO
me that II In any wise nbridges the privileges
Of the first, which were lawful when con.
ferrod
But to proceed, there is no complaint
have heard nothing B ntP o1losy " Of them ia
their relations rs citizens. They were the
pioneers of that territory They carved out OF
that mountainous sterile region q field OF en-
terprise, and laid the foundation of commit
nifty which has prOspcred wonderfully. They
have been instrumental In promoting the i'm.
provement which the government prosecuted
neross their territory and there is to-day, after
twenty-five or more years of settlement In
that region, nothing said against them as Just
them as legislators Nothing In the world Is
charged against their moral rectitude aud
their fairness, except those three subjects,
which are really one subject
Congress in dealing with thateubIect had ro.
course 70 its power to correct aud punish crime.
~ treating of that subject II has gone to q
length which no state has gone to in the Union,
and to which the federal government has not
gone to In respect to any other crime. 1t isnow
proposed Notwithstanding the penalties OF big
outstanding they are severer there than any
where else in civilized countries to add to them.
II j. proposed that Notwithstanding all the
crime, and the rules of redress which nra &C.
Ccptable elsewhere are open to the government
there, that certain other additional ana cN-
traordinary remedies aud methods shall be
These measures if employed cndangcr the
very condition of things which the law pre-.
tends To hold In high esteem, the sanctity and
purity OF the marriage relation and the personal
security OF the citizen. II for the first time
proposes TO bring the husband and wife into
hostile litigation against each other. Not tho
unlawful husband and wife, because there Is no
objection to that under the law as II now Is,
but the proposition Is that the lawful husband
and wife shall be arraigned against each other
In the courts. II was said by the gentleman
on the other side that you could not punish
any more cases under this law than under the
TN hHV nd hat Ia KH1NN hn VNYNa la.l IA
tXtfnordpary remedy Of Acknowledgement.
Now, II you cannot punish any more cases,
what good VIII be promoted by this change!
especially hnrsh methods of procedure. He
stated that the practice Of cohabitation was
secret and difficult of discovery, aud, there
fore, he did not know to what extent II pre-
vailed. five do not know to what extent IL
prevails how IRE we justified In saying It does
prevail TO the extent OF half the inhabitants
Of the territory There is no evidence before
this committee that the law lacks In efficiency,
or there is any lack OF zeal in Furnishing big
amy, pOlygamy, and unlawful cohabltation as
the law stands, and that the laws, as they now
are, are not perfectly adequate 10 that end.
II is said, however, that they will not obey
the law, ard because trey will not promise to
acted; that because they will not, as 1t Is said,
promise TO obey the law, the whole community
shall tie punished illegally. Now, want TO
complained Of In regard to letters and dec
laratops of parties who were asked II they
wou'd obey the law, some made no reply, and
some some neelatSa lhnt they would PC ostraciled II
plain? II is not that they are punished for
Dlgainy or polygany because not IN single
o orS, was my s.a,ement maue wherein pOyg
cases Of unlawful cohabitation, 1t was in
these cases ana III the law as construed In
these cases that these parties refused to say
mat they would support the law or remained
silent when asked. What Is the objection N
the construction OF the present lazy 1t Is this,
a man " held guilty. OF cohabitatiOn with
second wife, though he has not visited her for
period OF FIVE years, he is adjudged guilty Of
nnlaw,tl combination and punished though
he had not cohabited. The Supreme Court ofthe
these Illicit, offensive relations be paraded con-
SANITY before the public by cohabitation
that the party was guilty Of cohabitetion
IN contemplation OF that statute, though he
had not met the person with whom he was a1.
judged to be guilty for I'VE years ,,.,..,,,
Mr. stewart. Or he had not been living with
Mr. Chandler, Yes, sir; 4 he had not been
nnGer the same roof with her and she not
lyed under inc same rooi with MIN. They
lng from that opinion, says he knows OF no In.
stance where cohabitation has been construed
20 mean Whs he magistrate S Of the Vfsa
memorial Of the Mormon ladies sets out the
case very clearly, showing 70 this committee
that II a Eerson hdd entered into that relation
and there was no Other. proof before the court
than that he entered into that relation, then
he Is presumed to be guilty OF unlawful Co
has not visited the person for five years;
that support of his offspring and Of his So
called second wife is sufficient evidence to
authorize the conviction OF guilt, say that
Is against the Judgment OF the civilized world,
ana That construction Is what they complain
of, o,., MN,
inc chairman. VIII you say that was de-
ciaed N tbe opinion OF the supreme Court
MI Chandler. Yes, SIR. we arc not asking
now ihat me law us construed be repealed; we
say, rs inc law now is, ~ Is suinclently hnrsh
LOT nyDody; no matter now bitterly they feel
lo Mn tne Morm Mons 40, ,,,,.o u.,,,,..,,,.
these trials of cases for the, most part, those
ihnt were estaplished alter tue passage OF the
laW OF iso5 pIohipltlng poiyghmyT
Mt Shandler; suppose so 49, :. .,,,
,hnir evcS en nnelr tey MSht MO a. s MIN
the law;
nj. Chhhnler; am noI complaining OF the
~ insy SH 0i uroer paoptp
that we are are not asking that the law be re;
pthleui INC statute OF nrhilatlon cuts OH
SuiFeu 30 many years ngo, out lhey Say tnat
r an WY si ,l
or Glsnmy ~ , period period, wh w would protect
mem uhder NC sntule OF Imltalohs' yet, II
my suppVIteu tiSil oiisprIns aince tne sintute
~ "I imriI wives, they nre gully OI
htn um,u' eoh1p'"''oi' ho' PoiSBainS UT
o'WSu r SS;,o,ort Won do M, ,,oo, ~ so,ho,
ii s, iUu uV NJ ,mear az w. ~ snas
n St ~ o,IbpiinS W oI,u pi s't us.
R iata ar,, ,',,, Wou,H ~ W. "i,a
Wy Wy P"iS gum! vi uH'""iu' o"n"oi'"'oii' oo
cn,,r, I m iers1, 1 Iyo .s rre
supIehI Cou', os .he TdI''4lS 9i Saah ~ pun
nenessa ,veS 70 op hnt ev ,ived rndnr ,Sc
same 1901, SLEPT n the same PED or visited
eaSn Grnsr y rI'eS T NY, dt
relation they are not punished for binam S ar