Daily tobacco leaf-chronicle. (Clarksville, Tenn.) 1890-1895, 1890-05-21
CONSTITUTIONAL.
The COnfiscatiOn of MOrm0n
Church Property.
The United States Supreme
Court So Decides.
Chief Justice Fuller and Justices Field
Their Reasons-Bill Pending by Which
States May Prohibit the Importation of
LIQUORS.
TIE EpMuNps AcT.
Held to BE Constitutional BY the Supreme
Court,

|
| Court.
WASHINGTON, May 2t.--The supreme
court Of the United States has rendered
an opinion of vital interest to the Nor
mon church, in the suit of the Church
! of Latter Day Saints against the United
| States, which comes here ON appeal from
the decision of the supreme court of
! Utah in favor of the United States. The
court affirms that Judgment.
The case grows out of the passage of
the Edmunds anti-polygamy law by the
Forty-ninth congress. This law, among
other things, dissolved the Mormon
church corporation, annulled its charter,
| directed the appointment of receiver
to wind up its affairs, and escheated to
the United States all the real estate
owned by the church in excess of $780,
600 which was not on the date Of the
passage of the act held for purposes of
worship or burial. When the United
States, under the terms of this act, be-
gan proceedings to confscate about
$3.50, 600 worth of property belonging to
the church the Mormons Immediately
entered suit to have the Edmunds law
declared unconstitutional 1t was ar
gued before the supreme court, in their
behalf, that congress, by the dissolution
| of the church corporation, had assumed
| judicial powers, and that the act of the
| legislative assembly of Utah incorporat-
| ing the church constituted contract
which could not be impaired by con-
gress, under its authority to repeal ter
ritorial enactments.
1t was also held that the doctrine of
escheat was alien to the spirit of free in
stitutions, and that it had never been
applied in this country to a church or
charitable corporation. One the part Of
| the United States it was contended that
congress had authority to repeal all ter
ritorial enactments; that the act incor-
porating the church was invalid as an
attempt to establish religion contrary
| to the provisions of the constitution, and
| that. moreover, the charter should be
| As, when the church corporation was
dissolved, there was no one to whom to
| turn over the property, it was properly
escheated to the United States.
In its opinion the court says. A dis
| tinguishing feature of Mormonism is
well known to be polygamy and an alb
solute ecclesiastical control of its church
members Notwithstanding all the ef-
forts made to suppress this barbarous
practice of polygamy, the sect pelse-
veres, in defiance Of law in propagating
and promoting this nefarious doctrine.
| The existence of such propaganda is
blot on our civilization. The organiza-
ton of community for the spread of
polygamy is a return to baIbarism. The
question therefore, Is whether the pro-
motion of such an unlawful system, so
repugnant to our laws, is to be allowed
to continue, and, whether the enormous
| funds which have been accumulated
| shall be welded for the propagation Of
the obnoxious practice-for the promo
tion of an organized rebellion
against the laws Of the United
States. The history of the gov
ernment's dealings with the Mormons is
one of patience ON the part Of the Amer
| Jean government and of resistance to
| law and pitiless atrocities on the part Of
the Mormons. The contention that
polygamy is part of the Mormon's re-
iigious belief Is a sophistical plea. No
| doubt the thugs Of India imagined that
their belief in assassination was q re-
ligious belief, but that did not make it
so. Society has q perfect right to pro-
hibit offenses against the enlightened
sentiment of mankind. Since the
church persists in claiming the right to
use the funds with which it has been
endowed for the purpose of promoting
| these unlawful practices, the question
arises. has the government the right to
seize these funds which the Mormon
| leaders are misusing and devote them
| to worthy and charitable purposes as
| nearly akin as possible to those to which
| the funds were dedicated?
After an elaborate historical review of
the common law, the court comes to the
conclusion that congress had the right
| to seize the property and says; Con
| Rress had before it a contumacious Or
ganization, welding by its resources an
immense power in the territory of Utah
and employing those resources in con-
stantly attempting to oppose, subvert
and thwart the legislation of congress
and the will of the government of the
| United States. Under such circum-
stances we have no doubt of the right
of congress to do rs 1t did"
The degree of the lower court is af-
firmed. Justice Bradley delivered the
opinion.
| Dissention.
Chief Justice Fuller said that he and
| Justices Field and Lamar We're con-
strained to dissent from this decision.
| The power of congress to legislate over
the territories was not incident to the
treaty making power, and its power is
restricted directly to that expressed or
implied in the constitution. There is no
such power granted rs that involved in
the act under consideration Congress
unques:ionably has power to suppress
| polygamy, and it is ilnmaterial whether
the crime was committed in the name of
religion. But congress has not power to
seize and confscate the property of cor
porations because they may have been
guilty Of crime.
| Kentucky Defeats Indiana.
In the suit between the states of Ken
tucky and Indiana over Green River
Island. situated on the northern side of
the Ohio river, very near Indiana, the
court, in an opinion by Justice Field,
holds that the island belongs to Ken
L A 4