Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1899-04-22
Action Taken in the General AS
sembIy at Pittsburg.
HOME PREACHER EXPLAINS.
The Proposition 20 Admit PoIyRa.
misss Into the Presbyterian Church
Was Undecided.

Editor Dcscret News.
In your issue. April 18th. you publish
what IA. on the face OF II. Newspaper
report Of some remarks which had been
made In the Presbyterian General As
Ecmbiy. while In session In Pittrburg
Pa. The remarks, II made. as reported.
were the remarks Of individuals and
not OF the Assembly M a whole. The
Presbyterian church recognizes no one
A. a divlnely authorized. or inspired
mouthpiecc. In Its councils. every ons
speaks for himself. Hence the Assem-
bly,. NJ such. could no more be held re-
sponsible for the remarks Of individuals
In debate than the House Of Rcprcsen-
tntlvcs could be held responsible for
what IL said by Individual members IN
debate. or than court could be held
Responsible for tho statements OF an at
torney during an argument upon mo-
tion or before jury.
In your issue OF April 18th. you speak
| OF the same matter ns tho action OF
the Presbyterian General Assembly In
pennsylvania." and In the same article
| you repeat.
IT was tho action Of the Assembly
NJ to the permission to converts In In
| dia TO retain their polygamous wives.
TO which we directed the attention OF
our Presbyterian friends In Utah. The
particular point OF Interest was the de.
claration that; The recognition OF
polygamous marriages By the ircsby-
terrain church In India was an absolute
necessity"
Now. submit that this would natur-
ally leave the Impression upon your
readers that the General Assembly OF
the Presbyterian church In fittHhurH'
Pa. did take some action ~ TO the
permission OF converts In India to re-
tain their poiyRnmouH wives" Whereas,
the said General Assembly tool such
action. neither does the Newspaper 70.
port which yuu quote In your Issue OF
the 18th. say that the General Assembly
took such action.
Your editorial Of the 18th. also SEEM.
10 imply that thu Presbyterian General
Assembly declared that
THE recognition OF polyEamoua mar
riagcn. by the Presbyterian church. in
india. was an absolute necessity, ana
amy other rule would rule David out
OF the church."
Whereas. the Presbyterian General
Assembly did not at that time nor at
any other tim. make any such dcclarn-
ton. That remark was. by the news
paper report which you quoted. attfi-
butrd 10 Dr. Morrison. who was acting
a. attorney for those who favored W.
hitting the matter 81 the admission OF
poiygamirts Into the church In India
TO the synod OF India; and, " such re-
port Il correct. the said remark bears
precisely .hc rame relation to the action
Of the Assembly, ~ do the remarks OF
an attorney TO n ruling of n court,
Now. assuming that You mean 10 be
perfectly fair. ask you 20 publish the
action Of the Presbyterian General As
Hcribly exactly AZ " u, AS SHOWN ny
the official records. which ! shall be
glad to put before you. " you 80 deHirc.
TIL. request In the memorial OF the
synod OF India upon which the action
of IN. Assembly was taken " aH fol-
lows
"we respectfully request the General
Assembly. IN view OF the exceedingly
difficult complications which often oc-
cur In the cases Of polygamistH who de-
sire Ia be received into the church, 10
leave the ultimate decision In all such
cases In India TO the synod of india.
Upon this request the General Assem-
bly, at plttaburg took no action except
To refer II, after discussion. TO "A special
committee OF two ministers and one rui-
ing elder 20 report TO the next Assem-
bly, The committee was nn tollown'
Rev. H. ". Craven. ID, lat d., Rev
John u. Wells, DID. and Elder George
Junkin. Ill. y.
Saratoga Springs. n. Y. A. this meeting
the abov.-named committee reported
somewhat at ength. the report cover
INK nearly u PAGE and n half 81 the
printed minutes. l shall not ask you 4"
publish the whole OF II unless you pre-
f.r 10 do 30, After giving an account
az Tia mo.tinFn, It's methods OF work.
and after calling attention To the fact
that chapter xii OF the Form OF Govern
ment requires the General Assembly, To
retain Anal Jurisdiction In all
matters that AFFECT the doc
trlne or constitution OF the church.
IL repeats the request Of the mem
orini that the General Assembly leave
the ultimate decision In cases OF poly
ranilrts who may desire 20 unite with
the church of that country. TO the synod
~ India. The report then concludes as
follows.
''The only Recommendation reported
Ia the Assembly iHi That In View OF the
mandatory nature Of chapter xii. Soc
lion 4. OF the form ~ government, the
request OF the synod Of india contained
In the memorial cannot be granted.
The above recommendation OF the
committee was unanimously ndontedi
and hence II became the action OF the
Assembly In reHpons" TO the request or
the synod " India.
II VIII be seen, therefore. that the ne
tion does not touch the merits OF the
question as 10 whether a convert from
henthenigin, who for years has been
pOlygainlat IN accordance with the laws
aud customs of his country, can, or
cannot. properly be received into the
Presbyterian church without firat
ccaslng his polysnmous cohabltation.
Thanking you In advance for the use
~ your columns To clear mp an nppar-
ent misrepresentation ns TO the heton
of our Gcnerat Assembly In reference
To q matter OF general interest. l am,
Yours with great respect,
WIN, II. CAMPBELL,
Salt Lake City. Utah. April 81. is9e'
Isomc comments on tho foregoing viii
be- found on page four OF this Issue OF