Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1889-11-30
HDGE ,yDERsox,S DECISION.

- i .
ofJohu Moore and other applicant
for citizenship, viii be found in thu
issue Of the DEsEKET NEws- In
conclusions reached by His Homo
will not greatly disappoint person
of either party who watched thu
proceedings in court, and Noted thu
Judges repeated rulings in favor o
the obfectors and the trend Of hi
own interrogations and remarks
during the course Of the invesdga
ton.
The so-calIed Liberals" vii
greatly rejoice OF this obstruction
TO the naturalization Of alien mem
hers Of the Peoples Party. TheiI
present exultation, however, is
somewhat tempered by their very
evident anticipation Of the result
from the beginning, the cause Of
which is not difficult to surmise.
The people will see in this decision
one more act Of gross injustice TO-
ward them on account Of their adj
herence to an unpopular religion,
and another "LIheral" obstacle
thrown in the path TO 4 full and
fair election.
At the risk OF being considered
"treasonabIe," in having the ter
merity to differ in opinion with a
Federal official, we win briefly re-
view some points in this pc
culiar judicial decision. Trea-
son is clearly defined in
the Constitution Of the United
states, and dissent from official
views is not included in the defini-
ton. Yet men here who claim to
represent the Government, or who
have at any time represented it Off
cially, seem 20 take the ground that
anything uttered 10y n "NIOrmon"
in criticism Of the servants Of the
peopIe, is reasonable in its charac-
ter and seditious in its spirit. All
the sfreasons that either Judge
Anderson or the attorneys whose
reasoniugs he appears TO have
adopted can charge against the
mormon Church, consists simply
in the deuunciation Of the conduct
Of individuals charged with official
duties under the Government. This
is not in any sense Rreasonable''
unless the term has acquired a new
Specification.
Judge Anderson falls into several
errors in his review Of the testimony.
He says that among the eleven wit
nesses for the directors several had
held the position Of Bishop in the
Church, This was true Of only
one Of these witnesses. In speaking
OF the garment worn by persons who
have received the endowment, he
wrongly describes it and also states
that "near the throat, and over the
heart, and in the region Of the abdo-
men are certain marks or designs in
tended to remind the wearer Of the
penalties that will he inflicted, etc. =
No such evidence was given, and 1t
Is not true. The marks are not rs
the Judge states, nor are those signs
which exist made for any such OBJ
icct. Everybody who knows any
thing about the matter viii recog-
rize the error and SO viii any Mason
who has seen the marks.
The Jadge says in regard TO the
testimony Of the witnesses for the
or covenants are taken or entered
into in these ceremonies renders the
testimony Of but little value, and
tends to confirm rather than contra
dict the evidence on this point Of
fered by the directors. Is this fair
and cOnformable to the rules relat-
ing to evidence? We think not.
The Judge in the opening Of the
declared emphatically
that it should go no farther than to
whether there was any,
thing in the endowment in the
nature Of an oath agaius; the Gov
arnment Of the United States.
How well he kept his promise the
report Of the proceedings showsl.
These witnesses swore there was
not and that there was no mention Of
lr allusion TO the Government OF the
United States. In this they were
'orrOborated 10y all the reputable
witnesses for the objectors. There
vas positively no proof offered to
he contrary. The evident fabri- |
.ators Of too willing supporters OF |
he ohjecting attorneys, or differences
Irawn from half forgotten reminis- |
ences, were entirely swamred by |
he positive testimony on both sides \
hat no such obligation was taken. |
Is to an oath, it was shown that no |
ath Of any kind is administered in
hese ceremonies.
Now, then, suppose a case. II a
Jason were placed on the stand and
sked, 'Is there anything in the
lasonic rites which Is hostile TO the
Government Of the United States?,,
lie would answer in the negative.
then questioned in regard to OBJ
cations which he had agreed 70
eep secret he would reply, 81 de-
line to answer And II he were
ne to his agreements he would
Iffer impris0nment,and even great
penalties, rather than reveal his
.cret covenants. The Mormon
illnesses were on similar ground
Gould it then be fair TO infer. be.
use a Mason would refuse TO Hstate
'ecifically what oaths, obligations .
covenants are takenY in Masonic
remonies, that his objection would :
nd 10 confirm any vicious accusa-
IN that might be made against
m?
The Judge says: "The evidence !
-ablishes beyond any reasonable
ubt' that the endowment cere-
'nies are incompatible with the :
legations and duties of citizens of
2 United States. We say the =
idence establishes nothing Of the l
nd nor even any approach TO it. :
le Judge has not cited any evil
nee which goes to establish that
lclusion. The preponderauce Of -
idence actually establishes tho u
ltrary. The witnesses for the OBJ .
tors mainly corroboratel the tes- :.
lony for the applicants on this u
'otal point. And rs a matter Of y
I, We know and every man and "