Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1899-08-03

The Utah County Democrat Of
August g takes up the question q the
alleged understanding with the nation,
on which Utah entered the Union as a
State. II IL live topic. because q has
been put nnoat By designing persons for
religious and political purposes. and il
o matter Of public discussion. We Give
our Provo contompoary's sensible
views as offered oditorlaily, eliminating
only those portions that relate to a
Salt Lake paper with which II r. use
less 90 enter into argument. because It
never keeps TO q question and always
lodges the real Issue. The Democrat
says:
Considerable controversy has been
ana On being INDUCED iu between tho
salt Lake dailic1 ns to the mutual un-
durstnuding between the people of
Utah and the nation on the question
" polygamy at the time % the granting
ul statehood. Lot ne look az
a little history and facts In regard TO
this matter. In an address before the
Territorial Bar association ~ Utah In
January, 1895. Hon. e.. f. Narian. then
"a Republican. a Liberal. and "a member
~ the Constitutional Convention. said.
referring 20 Statehood Tor Utah;
In accordance with the general con-
ylctlons ~ civilized men and the spirit
% free institutions. religious liberty
VIII De- fully secured by the organic law
AMI "a prohibition against plural or po-
lyFamous marriages adopted In deivr-
onc' o. the suggestion by Congress.
Whether Il shall ever BE- stricken from
the Constitution will depend solely up
on the future temper ana VIII Of tho
puplo, n will be observed that tho
actual p1lygnmuua status, or living
with two ur more women ne wives,
known IN Utah ua n criminal uffenHo
termed unlawful cohabtation.' ~ not
referred 60 In the pruvlHo u tho En-
abuug Act. Whether tho Constitution
builders will content themselves with
prohibiting p0lyHamuua marriages. or
Will 40 further and prescribe the poly
gumoua association also VIII be de-
ut viii be- noted by Mr.. varian'a state
ment that polyRamous relations were
not referred 90 Ia the Enabling Act. II
will also be noted that the Constitution
of Utah while prohibiting future p1-
lyEnmuuB marriages. does not refer TO
relations with former polygnmoua
spd g,nt"baod. No "vidence
has ever been produced 90 show that
any pulyghmous marriages have been
celebrated IN Utah since Statehood. and
We can consequently maintain that the
State Constitution IN that respect and
doing all that was Implied In the UNDER
standing with the nation.
"Sow ns 60 another phase Of this 'un-
| doratandinE with the nation. AZ the
time Of Statehood no one believed that
members N the Mormon Church who
/ had heretofore married plural wives
and berottcn children would desert
/ those wives ana children. The man
who would do 20 :. worse than brute.
| We DO not believe In polygumy. neither
| DO We believe IN the dosortluu ~ n
! family taken at the time Of a general
] religious belief IN this state u that
| principle. The question IL Fighting It.
relf ns rapidly as poHHiblo. No polyg-
| nmouH marriages are being celebrated
and with the passing Of the elder Een-
Grafton an win be fully settled.
We feel no heHltnncy In saying that
Utah has kept faith with the nation,
both ns 10 contract and implied UNDER
| standing"