New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1890-05-20
AGAINST THE MORMON CHURCH.
CONGRESS HAS THE RIGHT TO SEIZE CHURCH
PROPERTY - DECISIONS Of THE
COURT.

SUPREME tOO M
WASHINGTON May 10.-The supreme Conrt 'ouaS
rendered an opinion Of vital interest 10 the Morno"
church in the suit OF the Church Of LatterDay
saints against the United states whcn comes mere vi
.,,no,i from, the decision OF the Supreme Court
F.h e. favor NJ the United states. This court airmS
ut ,,d1ncnt The case grows ont OF the passage
y, the Edmunds Anti Polygamy law by the NLlAth
concrcss Thi, law dissolved the Mormon 'hurch
corporaton annulled It's charter, directh the ap
nolntment Of a receiver 70 wind mp ia aNair'' ana
ho,ed - the United states all the real estate owned
by the Church in excess Of S3oooo wm'h WIS ho'
an the date Of the passage OF the at held for purposes
~ worship or burial When the United etatc'
under the terms Of this act began proceedings 10
cornsra,a about 100000 worth Of property be
longing 10 the Church. the Mormons Immediately en-
tered sut 10 have the Edmunds law declared uhcoh-
,tttutioual. II argued before tine supreme court
I'm their behalf that Congress by the dissolution OF INC
church corporation had assumed judicial powers, ana
that the act Of the Legislative Assembly OF ttah
iucorporating the Church constituted contract when
,d NOT be i'm paired by Congress under II, authority
to rcpeal territorial enactments II WIS also held
that the doctrine OF eschet was alien u the spirit Oh
fr, institutions, and that IL had never been appled
I'm thi, country church or charitable corpoid'loi
ON the part II the United States II was conehded taa'
Congre,, had authority To repeal all territorial enact
meut.. that the act Incorporating the Church was
to tho provisions 81 the Constitution and that. more
over the charter should be anulled for abuse Of the
granted rights A. when the Church corporation was
dissolved there was no 10 whom 20 turn over the
property, II properly e-cheated to the onited
states.
Two questions the court says, are involved In TINS
case The first is has Congress the power to repeal
tho charter Of the Church OF Christ OF LstterDay
saints TIi, question Il answers in the affirmative
Congress has supreme power over the Terrtories IL a
ouired by purchase otherwise and BeherdiiS r"-
.ervcd A. II did In the OF Utah. the rgt 10 reNoNc
All act, Of the Territorial legislature II ioUo"s hcIe
o,rs That IL had the right to revoke the Chur'h
,.,,.r DISTINGUISHING feature Of MOrnoniNm Is
vol known 10 bc po gamy and an absolute ccele'aSu
,al control Of ito church members. NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS.
an m. efforts made u suppress this barbaro"S pra'u'o
~ polysamy the per-evcre, in defiance OF Ia" III
rrop,eatlng and promoting this nefaHous uoo''i'o
. ,h. church persists In claiming tho right TO use
the funds with which it has been endowed l'r .lo
,,rn,ee Of promoting these unlawful pra'tloeS inc
, ,i,n arises ha, the Government the right TO Seze
,boe fund,f The court concludes that Congress lad
the right 10 seize the property
The decree Of the lower court Is ahrIheN'
hcf Justice Fuller said that he and Justices fleo
and Lamar were constrained 10 dissent rom ''' u0
.-,,n Congress unqucstonably has power - sup
/ rre., polvgamy. and II j. immaterlA "'c''o' eio
rr,n,, WA, committed in the name Of religion. hu'
| ,,,o.r... b,, not power to seize and conuScate Io
]
uropcrty Of corporations because they nave o'on
a,lty Of crime. IN the Judgment OF the minority
tbe diversion o, the fund contemplated by congress
is i,, conformation OF the specific limitations oi '"'
| Constitution. .,
/ a., ,rinion was also rendered Affirming the ludg
mont If the Circuit Colrt OF tho United states TOT 'o
western District Of Arkansas in favor ot the southern
Kansas Railway Company against the 'heroAec va
| ,,or The Cherohecs contended that an ACT oi Noh.
| no. Granting the railroad company right OF way
through the Indian Territory was void on th' srou"'
th,, the Cherokee Nation a sovereign state anu
that the United states had not the right OF e.'en.
dnmaiu over her territory The court uocS h"' "e'N
! with this contention. ,, l., .o, ., ,ho
Ina rourt also rendered opinion In favor OF uic
,,,ou holders on all points In the several suit> "
! Cnnner Bryan. McGancy, Elicit brown anu N NV,
Irt against the state ot Virginia arising 3It ID a
used by virginia to prevent coupon hoIurrs nU TIL,
r,rc,lins the state 70 accept coupons In paymeh,,
| - trr&os The decision II the supreme Court Ui
| 1.n",ls NJ Virginia is reversed IN each case ~
N rr,.on on two other Virginia TAX coupon caSe
Wv, To,rt decides In favor ot the state on Speoai
/