Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1901-03-20
WHERE THE STORMS START.

Our local contemporaries are quoting
with glee the comments OF eastern pa
pers, on the Evans bill and its veto by
the Governor. The attempt is made In
this connection, to show that the cause
Of the agitation on this subject was the
bill, and that II any blame is to be at
tached to anyone or anything. II must
fall upon the bin or It's author. That
may be thought adroit and cunning
but its sophlstry Is easily perceptlbe,
when the remarks OF the press are ex-
amined and traced to their text. We
will quote little from some Of them.
The Chicago Record says:
The bill In question provides that no
person may bring a charge OF polygamy
except the alleged plural wife OF the
accused or one OF his blood relations
IL was represented, on behalf OF the bill
that II would put stop to malicious
prosecutions growing out Of political or
sectarian controversies. As a matter Of
fact, the whole effect OF the bill would
be to give the polygamlst exemption
from the nations laws and usages re-
speeding marriage. So long as he kept
on good terms with his wives and his
relatives he would be free to practice
polygamy without restraint"
The Record. II will be remembered. is
the Chicago "enterprising" paper that
inserted a paragraph of Its own adop-
ton, in a dispatch which It announced
as by the Associated Press" when no
such language was sent through that
medium. 1t was copied from a Salt
Lake paper or special, and was false in
every respect. No wonder that the
editorial comments are along the same
lines
The same paper, under the false I'M
preston thus obtained, makes this COM
ment on the Governors veto.
Governor Wells veto message is Ia
mentally Illogical In It's reasoning and
obviously deferential to the polygamist
sentiment In Utah. He loudly protests
bis friendship for the people who are
anected by this act. asserting that the
proposed law would BE- most effective
weapon against the very classes II
aims to protect, He points out. more
over. that the bill would create a de-
mand upon Congress for a constitution
Al amendment designed to cover the
particular needs OF Utah, and he de-
alares that this would be obnoxious to
the people Of the State"
The Kansas City Star commends the
Governor under the same miseppre-
hension, in these words;
Whether Utah recognizes the fact or
mol. Governor Wells Is entitled 10 inc
gratitude OF his State for yetolnR Inc
obnoxious Evans bin which wo,ld
practically have nullifed the stater
anh-polygamy laws The adoptlon AZ
lhe measure would have been a blot ON
The name Of Utah. and woula have ted
70 contest between that State and the
lest OF the Union. which would have
proved disastrous TO the Mormon COM
nenity; The country would never have
auo"ea me system Of polygamy 10 be
pioleeted by the law. The success OF
ne Evans measure would have meant
ne adoption Of constitutional amend
neni under which the federal govern
neht would have had power 10 enforce
ne laws against plural marriages"
Inc laws against plural marriages
were not affected In the least by the
swans bill, but the daily title-''The
vans Polygamy bill' given TO II By
ne salt Lake morning papers, de-
'ei'ed our eastern and western contem.
'oraries. and hence the false notion