Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1890-02-21
REGARDING THE TEST OATH
DECISION.

The following account of an in
terview with President George o.
Cannon and the annexed biographi-
cal sseteh appeared in the st. Louis
GSo5e-DenlOcrat Of the 10th inst:
Mr.. George Q. Cannon, First Coun-
selOr to the President, and one OF tbe
highest dignitaries OF the Mormon
Church. talked freely and interestingly
today about the decision.
1t is very sweeping in its conclu-
sions." he said, land gives the Trainer,
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
10 show that this man who took the
oath and voted was not polygamist.
1t was further set forth by testimony
That the Mormon Church is not at
Inc present time teaching or encourag-
ing polygamy. Bishop Bulge Of
Idaho, testified clearly on that. But
ms evidence was not given any CON-
sideration IN the lower court. The
iAc' that the Church had in the past
1ught and abetted polygamy was
'aken as sufficient. In the Supreme
Courts decision the present attitude ~ |
the Church upon the subject Is ignora5
although counsel were careful 70
emphasize it in the arguments. Tho
Supreme Court. in its decision. as
sumes 1t as established that Mormon
ism today means polygsmy, and on
that wrong premise declares that Nor
mons can be disfrsachised.n
What will your people do about
don't know what We can do.p
Why doesn't the head of vopr
Church-the First Presidency and the
Twelve Apostles-issue an official de-
iaration upon the subject. why dont
you say, as Church, that polycamv
Is no longer taught and is not anconr-
aged by the Church? Wouldn't ,ba,
meet the decision Of the SupreD,. /
Court and enable your people to take | j
the test oathfr H'--il ,
some think 1t would and advise t
such step be taken. But a declara- !
uon OF that kind is open to objections. {
We have already declared and shown 4
our intention to obey the laws. We I
are trying TO live in conformity with !.
the legislation enacted on the snb;a., I
oi PolySamy. Suppose the p-incipaI D
onncers OF the Church put forth the n
ohcial assertion. 1t has been repea.- y
edly charged that our people blindJv I,
follow few leaders. viii not sucb !,
declaration be an admission on our y
part that the charge is true; that the h
ew men control the lives and con. a,
sciences Of the mass Of believersY II nj
Gems to me we.are in danger Of stultjv
ng ourselves il we go further than We 81
nave We bow TO the law. We obev 10
ont"ardly.' Surely we ought not to Ii,
'e obliged TO declare what we believe q,
T do not believe as the price OF SUI tt
rage. Our conscienees are At least our ",
wn- You must remember that the m
octrine OF polygamy was accented in
1any years'ago as revelation from tn
iod. That revelation stands. We can n
ot wipe it out by a declaration Of N,
IAN We can submit to the laws a, o.
lr country and that we are doing. II al
ems to me that is as much As can ha s.
sked."
DO you think, Mr.. Cannon. tina, No
lormons can take The test oath hon. w,
tly without committing perjury,, w
Most of them can do it without Cs
olation Of conscience. Only the mi
nall minority Of our people have IA,
ed in polygamy. Those who have Fr,
ural wives living are disfranchised. 10
ie others, in the present attitude of Ia,
e Church, can truthfulIy subscribe ito,
the OATH" No
And say that they do not belong TO anc
organization which teaches or ad- Ter
es polygamy7p ISL,
Yes. There is no question in my yea