Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1891-01-27

acts and parts Of acts heretofore passed
by the said legislative assembly Of
the Territory Of Utah, which es-
tabIish, support, maintain, shield, or
countenance polygamy, he, and the
same hereby are, disapproved and
snnulled: IrOridoi, That this act shall
lc go limited aud construed ~ not 10
Affect or Interfere with the right Of
| property legally acquired under the
ordinance heretofore mentioned, nor
with the right TO worship God accord.
Ing 10 The dictates OF cOnsoience,' hut
only TO nnuul all acts aud laws which
establish, maintain, protect, or couu-
tennnec the practice " polygamy, etc.
AS this act was passed before the death
OF Thomas Cops, AMI OF course before
descent cast upon his children, II np.
plies 10 this case N the argument "
respondents be sound. The question Ia
then presented, does the Territorial act
Of lo52 establish, support, maintain,
shield or cDuntenancc polygamy2 IL
clearly does not establish, sur port or
maintain IT, Does IL shield OF coun.
tenanco ~ IL does not declare the
children OF polygamOus marriages 10 be
legitimate; In fact, II treats them rs
illegitlmate, or rather, II does not, eX.
cept by indlrectl0n or Inference. men.
ton them nj all; but II puts all Height.
mate ichildrcn, whether the fruits Of
polygamous or " ordinary adultcrous
or Illicit Intercourse, upon an equality
any ,sss 'leni WIN lnnetiu,nlc blood.
nots y ov''oI se.tIel tlau that
spos, nuu tne sanie may NC sail OF
sanh py ihpnca.lon' are not
.aN Soeu ~ tne courN, anu tnat no
s.,suVe WIN yc construed ~ rcpcallng \
~. vne u ,s NJ v'ealy iepushhnt
sh ". " 70 nuun't ., no o.her reason
III n oy'is VA, NioIool " smith,
aoI' ~, ~, owen VI hs.-e, o htll,
Ea - um ,e,est MaL %, iVoi
l ,., W .,ionol, wan, ~ United
S.. d. VI ~ .soVen rhchas.,,I nov,
20 ''eu nVoh W hehtyi lV9 " o.,
''Y,
80 V'ue' 70 supleu. nne TERRITORIAL act
W 20. 70 .ne "nnu,llny clause o. W..
~ =. SonbIess, w Vehuchcy 10 snleli
"a V.unsonhhoe poiygauy rh0uiu be
uuvvt anu uninlstikaule. no law
WIZ Nv ueohieu voiu because ~ may
,nu,Iec.iy' OF ny possible anu not a
nocesaty CONSTRUCTION, DC rcpugnant
W m nnnunhg hot us ulrcct apu
pIIAls,"'o ,ysuls are Mohe 10 bc con-
,hn W., mn,ieI Us osloie observed,
vic NC, may nave been passed In
vIe" OF 'he c<isung state OF thing.
hnu m hh inlltcet method OF
Iccognhihg the legitimacy OF poly
Hauou, enlluten' " mas no tendency
VA is.ei, 70 snleiu OF counlenanse poly-
ga W IM ~ ~ hppies 70 childfen.
LesnIauou Iot the protection OF emil
uIcn ovrn IN polygamy !. NOT neces-
-a1lIy LEGISLATION favorable 70 poly.
Bay, inete Is no Inconsistency IN
shleIu,hg Tue one anu IN announcing
.ne o.ne, ~ onihe, ~ mas never been
suppose, that me acts OF inc several
sIa.es lesluna,lns natural children,
whose parents ihIermarry al!er their
piiu,, hau the lightc.t tendency To
nileiu OF vouhtenahoo ilIlclt cohanitn-
Won, out ,hey were 1athef uesiHncd 70
protect tho uhIofIunate ehllaren OF
hose VINO were wiIlng 70 DO All IN
tneir power towards fightlng great
wrong. o. tne nc. IN question hau
necn passou III any o'het luiisuicuoh,
wouiu nave oeen conrluefcu a.
bsriec,iy harmless tnough possibly IN
ulscfet, exeIeise OF inc legislative
power, ana would not DO seriously
v,.ca ~ SUP .owhrus thc cH'ao'
hsntnsnt on poIyghnious system.
| rs this ACT annus only such Terri
.otiai laws ~ shield or eountcnance
polyganly, u We sustain the constfuc.
uoh ursed oy the respondents mere, u
must necessarily ioilow tnat the emil
uren OF poIygnmous marriages would
DC deprlvei OF th,ir power 70 inherit
hvui nv Ia'ncr, WINE tue onsprihS OF
otnet niiclt ,eIAuons wouil 20 let 70
inherit under tue net. Ihh would
.eoin 70 be ~ war with inc intent OF
thp Legislature.