Salt Lake evening Democrat. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1885-1887, 1886-03-05
able with more or less severity. Polygamy
hoe hnnn and now ia

to the United States the practice was I'M
lawful here under the laws OF our sister .
republic, as it was at common law and by !.
the statutes OF the States. In 1862 Con- |
gress passed an act against polygamy, |
which was declaratory merely of the |
common law then in force, with the |
addition that it fixed a penalty for its
violation. The Reynolds case declares
the law valid, and also held that
lawfully under the cloak OF religious
faith. In that case it was said that laws
were made for the government OF actions,
and while they cannot interfere with
mems religious beliefs and opinions, they
may with practices. Suppose one be-
| lieved that human sacrifices were u part
of religious worship, would it be seriously
contended that the civil government un-
der which he lived could not interfere to
prevent sacrifice? Or, il a wife re-
ligiously believed it was her duty to burn
herself upon the funeral pyre OF her dead
husband, would it be beyond the power
of civil government to prevent her carry
ing her belief into practice? So here, as
a law of the organization OF society under
the exclusive domain of the United
States, it is provided that plural mar
riages shall not be allowed. Can man
cause OF his religious belief? To permit
this would be to make the protested doc
trnes OF religious belief superior to the
laws OF the land and, in effect, to permit
every citizen to become law unto him
self.
Government could exist only in name
under such circumstances, and notwith-
standing the fact that polygamy was an
offense at the common law and held in
adherence by the Christian world and
that the laws for its suppression are de-
clared by the highest court to be consti-
tutional, the Mormon Church, which has
established itself in this Territory and has
built its structure upon
THE CORNER STONE OF PLURAL MARRIAGE,
Continues to grow and flourish and to
defy the law. 1t preached plural mar
riage, practced it openly, and boldly pro-
claimed its right to do 50, the laws and
the customs of the country notwthstand-
ing. 1t claimed that the practice was
right, and while all its members did not
practice polygamy, all advocated and de-
Tended the practice. No man IS Il true
Mormon who does not believe in the doc
trine of plural marriage. The Church
was active in PROSECUTING, and brought
thousands of converts from foreign lands
each year. 1t built up n strong
and powerful government, uniting
Church and State, which in its
laws and practices is antagonstic TO the
very foundation principles OF the United
States. Here, then, was q people build
ing up
AN EMPIRE WITHIN THE REPUBLIC,
: Whose members defied the laws OF the
| land, and boldly advocated and per-
} mitted practices which were at war with
the laws, customs and traditions of the
American people.
The statute OF 1862 had proved made
quate, and in 1882 what is termed rs the
Edmunds act was adopted, which pro-
vides for the punishment of polygamy
and unlawful cohabitation. The crime
,, OF bigamy or polygamy consists in enter
ing into bigamous or polygamous mar
, riage. The offense is complete when any
person who has husband or wife living,
, marries another. 1t is also complete
when any man simultaneously, or on the
same day, marries more than one woman.
This, however, does not apply to any
person by reason OF any former marriage
whose husband or wife by such marriage
has been absent for five successive years,
and is believed by such person to be dead,
: nor to any person by reason OF any for
u mer marriage which shall have been dis
!. solved by q valid decree OF competent
court on the ground of the nullity OF the
marriage contract In this Territory there
>, is no law regulating marriage;
NO FORM OR CEREMONY Is REQUIRED,
# And no record OF marriage is kept Mar
II riage is left as it was at the common law.
t There need be no witnesses present II
: the parties are competent to contract, all
that is essential is q present agreement
The marriage is complete when there is q
full, free and mutual consent OF parties
capable OF contracting. Proof that par
Z ties have treated each other as husband
u and wife, and have lived together as such
!, is sufficient to enable a court or jury tC
= find that Mt some previous time the par
= ties did as fact consent to be married
70 and did, rs Il fact, consent to be husband
y and wife; the mode of life, the holding
i out, the declarations or admissions of tho
= accused, and the like, are circumstanta
u may be inferred.
n THE oFFENSE OF CoHABITATIoN
is Is complete when man to all outward
o appearances is living and associating will
= more than one woman as n wife. II il
IS also complete when man has q lega
D. wife living from whom he is undivorced
| NllDll llt loltiS clll lIlu sup
j. ports as wife, and he at the same time
S. lives with another woman whom he sup
g ports, holds out and recognizes as a wife
:. By the term "holding out wife" is mean
g. such language and conduct as leads tn,
!: world to believe that the parties are liv
S, ing and associating as husband and wife
" The intention OF the law-making power il
p enacting the law against polygamy ant
Of cohabitaton was to protect monogami,
re marriage by prohibiting all other mar
ID riage, whether evidenced by ceremon,
n or by conduct and circumstances alone.
ry The Supreme Court OF the United
err States remarked in the case OF the United
w States vs.. Cannon, that the statute "seek
ne not only TO punish bigamy and polygam,
o. when direct proof OF the existence 0
" these relations can be made, but to pre-
u vent man from Haunting in the face o
the world the ostentation and opportuni
H. ties of a bigamous household, with all tn,
outward appearance of the continuanc,
~, oil the same relations which existed be
!. fore the act was passed." To constitut,
w the oilcnse it need not be shown that tn,
40 parties indulge in sexual intercourse, oc
~ cupy the same bed, or spend their tim,
y under the same roof. Abandonment ma,
be found against man guilty of cohabi
NJ tation for every day or other distinct in
-, teryal OF time dnring which he oifends
- ZACH nav TIAT A MtN g,Ntf n,,ry