Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1889-12-17

p Congress in crushing pOlygemy
and urged that this law was in Iin'
with that policy by depriving polyg
: amists and those who aided or abet
5 ted them Of political power. He die
, not state, however, that this actl0ni
il sustained, would throw the politi
cal power into the hands Of the
marty now in the minority, ana
whose days would be numbered IN
office If the franchise were re,
gained 0y those now deprived
Of it by the law in question.
He failed to show that tie whole
business was a political trick, hui
masked the real purpose OF ms
cheats under The guise Of moral
( reform, and shrewdiy held before
the eve Of the court what he termed
sThe appalling condition Of the
| sNTorrons' in Utah. In reply to n
statement Of Judge Wilson, that,
according to official reports, but ten
cases Of pOlygamy had reached con-
viction in four or five years, with
all the force of the federal govern
ment TO aid in their prosecution,
Ransford declared that 29l cases had
been tried, Of unlawful cOhacitatiOn,
which were due to polycamy rs a
condition precedent 70 this class Of
cases.
Mr.. Richards, in replying to the
willy logic of counsel for Idaho, or
rather for the party now in power
there, showed very clearly how
these cases Originated-that they
were prosecuted and convictions OBJ
tanned by technical constructions a
to cohabitation, and the trials were
in a large number Of instances Of
persons whose pOlygamOus relation
ship had commenced many yean
ago, ami were not, rs inferred, for
new violations of the Edmunds law.
Mr.. Richards presented some telling
illustrations Of the effect Of such
4 statute upon other classes Of
religionists, showing that believ-
ers and teachers Of cellbacy might
be deprived of the franchise as le-
gally a. those religiOuisls now
sought TO be enslaved politically. He
pointed out that this law attacked
the opinions Of men; that it even
DISTINGUISHED persons who belonged
to the Church, who might not them
selves believe in the tenet Of polyg-
amy; and cited the we'll known fact
that many people belong to religious
and Yet do not al
ways endorse every tenet Of the
This was very ably illus
trated. \ person might go to the
Tabernacle and hear the principles
Of faith, repentance and baptism.and
the laying on hands for the gift OF
the Holy Ghost; he might believe
all this and ask to become q member.
The instant he received these Ordi-
nances, he was disfranChised. al
though he might not have even
heard Of pOlygamy, or ever believed. |
aided or abetted the practice OF it.
This law does not stop at individual |
acts. but Furnishes men for the acts
Of others. by DISTINGUISHING them |
for simply belonging to the same
Church. He read the articles OF |
- Mormon" faith. and made quite a |
point in doing 50. Many visitors |
present had never heard Mormon
theology before. OF course | have |
not attempted to recount these points |
in anything like the language used |
by the eloquent speakers, rs l have |
lone it entirely from memory. and |
without memoranda Of any kind, |
lut | think l have given the sub
stance Of the arguments Of counsel
IN both sides Of this great cOnstitu-
iOnal question, which now faces
he highest tribunal in the land.
1t is the opinion among some
members of the bar that the court
,annot sustain this law: that the
cited in the briefs are
90 clear and pointed to he set aside.
md that religious freedom is too
precious 4 boon, rs well as the lib
,rty TO express thought, to be
acrificed by judicial action out Of
egard to any policy. The Supreme
COurt OF the United States is SO
,reat a tribunal, and composed OF
uch legal and learned minds. that
{ will give this subject, rs well IS
ii others, due and careful consid-
ration; for the liberty Of this man
; not the only thing involved,
hOugh that is sufficient. but the
.reat principles which underlie all
liberty in religion and in life are at
take in this question: II Idaho
au legally DO what it i now doing:
hen where shall the Judiciary draw
ne line? {. w. STAYNER.