The Helena independent. [volume] (Helena, Mont.) 1875-1943, 1890-05-20
SUPREME COURT DECISIONS.
VietAiy for the Dressed Beef Packers
~ Against the MOrmOns.

VietAiy for the Dressed Beef Packers
W Z Against the Mormons.
WASHINGTON, May 19.-The supreme court
has rendered an opinion holding unconsti-
tutional the law of Minnesota, requiring all
fresh meats sold in the state to be cut from
animals slaughtered within the state and
inspected twenty-four hours before the
slaughter. The case is of great interest to
the dressed beef men, who win.
The supreme court has also rendered an
opinion affirming the judgment of the cir
cult court in the suit of Cornell university
against Fiske, the we'll known Fiske will
contest, and it goes against the university,
The supreme court of the United States
to-day rendered an opinion of vital interest
to the Mormon church in the suit of the
church of Latter Day Saints against the
United States, which comes here on ap-
peal from the decision of the supreme
court of Utah, in favor of the United States.
This court af1irms that judgment.
This case grows out of Edmunds' anti
polygamy law, which dissolved the Mormon
1 United States real estate owned by the
church. The Mormons entered suit to have
the law declared unconstitutional on the
ground that congress-, by dissolution, as
sumed judicial power, and that the act of
legislation by the assembly Of Utah in in
4 tract which could not be impaired by con-
i gress, under authority of therepeal of terri
/ torial enactments, and that the doctrine of
escheat is alien to the spirit of free institu-
i tions. On the part of the United States it
was commended that congress had authority
act Incorporating the church involved an at
tempt to establish religion contrary to
/ the provisions of the constitution; that the
charter should be annulled for the abuse of
granted rights; and when the church corpo-
ration was dissolved there was no one to
whom to turn over the property, and it was
properly escheated to the United States.
Il In its opinion the court says: 1.-THE dis
sstinguishing feature of Mormonism is well
known to be polygamy and absolute con-
ttrol of its ecclesiastical church members.
Notwithstanding all efforts to suppress the
fbarbarous practice of polygamy, the sect
lperseveres in defiance of law in propagat-
ling and promoting this nefarious doctrine.
yThe question is, therefore, whether the pro-
motion of such an unlawful system, repug-
lnant to our laws, is to be allowed to con-
Itinue, and whether the enormous funds
which have been accumulated shall be
welded for the propagation OF the obnox-
sious practice and for the promotion
of organized rebellion AGAINST the
laws of the United States. The history
kOI the government dealings WIFI the MOI
mons is one of patience on the part of the
american government. and resistance to
Jaw and pitiless atrocities on the part of
The Mormons.
The contention that polygamy is part
Eof the Mormon religious belief is a sophisti-
E,al plea. The thugs of India imagined
il hat their belief in assassination was re-
lglous belief. but that did not make it so.
s society has perfect right to prohibit
Ephenses against the enlightened sentiment
,f mankind. After an elaborate historical
review of the common law the court
ays: Congress had opposing it this con.
umaclous organization, welding resources
II h immense power in the territory of Utah
md employing those resources in
Constantly attempting to oppose, subyert
nd thwart the legislation of congress andthe
'&viu of the government of theUnited States,
b nder such circumstances, we have no
g toubt of the right of congress to do as it
|1id. The decree of the lower court is
q ffirmed.
Justice Bradley delivered the opinion.
" hief Justice Fuller said he and Justices
II ield and Lamar were constrained to dis
ent. Congress unquestionably has power
o suppress polygamy. and it is immaterial
fhether the crime was committed in the
anne of religion. But congress has mot
n over to seize and confscate property of q
corporation because they may have been
IS utility of crime.
81 Justice Lamar rendered the opinion of
X - court in the case Of ]. G. Mccall.