The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1890-02-23
PRIEST. EO.Q.CANNON
His Talk With a st. Louis
Gl0be-DemOcrat Man.
THE SITUATION AS HE SEES IT.
The Attitude OF the Church in Regard to
Polygamy The Infamous Idahe
Test Oath.

WASHINGTON, Feb. Especial to the st.
Louis GIObe-Democrdt. Mr.. George O.
Cannon, first counselor to the president.
and one of the highest dignitaries of the
Mormon church, talked freely and Interest
ingly to-day about the decision.
sit is very sweeping in its conclusions.
he said, 'and gives the trainers of the
Idaho test oath all they ask for in their
proposition to disfranchise our people.
There is one point, however, which the
court ignored. Evidence was presented
when the case was tried to show that this
man who took the oath and voted was not
polygamlst. 1t was further set forth by
testimony that the Mormon church is not at
the present time teaching or encouraging
polYgamy. Bishop Bulge, of Idaho, testi-
ned clearly on that. But his evidence Was
not given any consideration in the lower
court. The fact that the church had in the
past taught and abetted polygamy was
taken as sufficient. In the supreme courts
decision the present attitude Of the church
upon the subject is ignored, although coun-
sci were careful to emphasize IL in the ar
guments. The supreme court, in its de-
clslon, assumed it as established that Nor
monlsm to-day means polygamy, and on
that wrong premise declares that Nor
mons can be disfranchised'
''What will your people do about it ?''
u don't know what we can do.n
why doesn't the head of your church
the first presidency and the twelve
apostles-lssue an official declaration upon
the subject. Why don't you say as
church, that polygamy is no longer taught
and is not encouraged by the church2
Wouldn't that meet the decision of the
supreme court and enable your people to
take the test oath.''
''Some think it would and advise such
step be taken. But a declaration of that
kind IS open to objections. We have al
ready declared and shown our intention to
obey The laws We are trying to live in
conformity with the legislation enacted on
the subject of polygamy. Suppose the
principal officers of the church put forth
the official assertion. 1t has been
repeatedly charged that our people blindly
follow few leaders. Will not such a
declaration to an admission on our part
that the charge is true; that the few men
contro. the lives and consciences of the
mass OF beheVerss 1t seems to me we are
In danger of stultifying ourselves if we go
further than we have. We bow to the law
we obey 1t outwardly. Surely we ought
not to be obliged to declare what we be-
heve or dc not believe as the price of suf-
1rage. Our consclenceS are at least our
own. You must remember that the doc
years ago as revelation from God. That
revelation stands. We cannot wipe it out
by declaration of man. We can submit
TO the laws OF our country, and that we are
doing. 1t seems to me that is as much as
can be asked"
''Do you think, Mr.. Cannon, that Nor
mons can take the test oath honestly with
out committing periury?'
Most OF them can do it without viola
ton OF conscience. Only the small minor
ity of our people have lived in polygamy.
Those who have plural wives living are
dlsfranchised. The others, in the present
attitude of the church, can truthfully sub
scribe to the Oath.'
And say they do not belong to an organ
lzation which teaches or advises polyg-
amyg'
''Yes. There is no question in my mind
that we can take this teStoath honestly |
say we mean our people. | do not in
clude myself, for L am one of the ultras.
There are two views of this question of
polygamy taken by our people. Some of
US believe that the revelation is a command
from God to take plural wives. [ so con
slider 1t. went into the church
when | was very young. 1t has al
ways been my belief that the revela-
ton commanded polygamy. Others,
and they are IN the majority, Go not regard
the revelation as making polygamy obliga-
tory. They consider it as permissive. I
obey the law, but do not acknowledge
that did any wrong in entering into polyg-
amy before the law was passed. [ provide
Tor all OF my children, and treat them pre-
cisely alike Since L came out of prison |
have provided for my wives, but have
not lived with any of them. | am living
the life OF bachelor, and sometimes it is
pretty hard on an old man like me, for
have had a good deal of sickness. and there
are times when / need home care and at
tention.''
What will the Idaho Mormons dos
VIII they take the oath and try to vote?
Can they get this question of the present
position of the church before the supreme
court.n
II don't know what they will do They
can take the oath conScientiously, but they
will probobly be prosecuted for perjury if
they do. Whether the Idaho courts will
continue 30 stand on the position taken
IN the Davis case l can't tell If it is as
Sumed by the courts that to be a Mormon
is to belong to an organization that en-
courages polygamy, then all of our people
who take the oath will render themselves
liable to punishment by the territorial
courts on the charge of perjury. | don't
know what our people in Idaho will do.
but don't think they will give up the
fight. They viii keep trying for their
rights. 1t is not characteristic of the
Mormons to give up. They will fight on
In the courts, Of course.n
''Will the admission of Idaho follow the
decision sustaining the test oath.''
Il can'ttell, but it looks probable. There
seems TO be a general feeling in Congress
favorable to the admission of new states
ANY other territory or any state can, by
the adoption OF a similar oath, disfranchise
the Mormons2n
YES. The decision is sweeping enough
Tor any of them to stand upon.n
Do you think the Idaho precedent will
be adopted elSewhere!"
mo. Ii Is not probable. There are
some Mormons in Wyoming. Colorado.
New Mexico and Arizona. They are rec
ognlzed as peaceable, industrious and
honest citizens. So far as / can
learn there is no disposition to disfran-
chise them generally. In Arizona a law
similar to that of Idaho was passed by the
legislature but the governor vetoed it. /
mao q talk the other day with one of the
most prominent public men in Colorado.
he told ne that the Mormons were well
nheo ID ms state; that they were good cit
1zenS In one county he mentioned the
Mormons voted the Republican ticket AT
the late election. There is no talk in Col
orado OF Glsfranchisement'
''How about Utahs DON'T YOU think tho
idea OF test oath may be applied there?,,
swell, that would have to be done by act
of Congress Tor Utah. Our people are very
largely il the majority there, and control
the territorial legislature. The test oath
could not be introduced as it was in Idaho.
where Republicans and Democrats united
! ,and put it through the legislature. Con
gress could pass a law applying the test
oath to Utah that would put the entire con-
troll of affairs in the hands of the non Nor
mons. There are in Utah about forty or
fifty thousand non Mormons, while our peo-
pie number one hundred and sixty thou
sand or more. Congress could order that