The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1903-11-14
Salt Lake city Utah. nov. 10. 1903

To The Salt Lake Herald.
I'm YOUR widely circulated paper APP
peared. this morning. purported account
Of the evidence 7 was called upon 70 give
In the case Of Hilton SIS. MCCOmick IN
judge Halls court lt contains 50 many
INACCURACIES, some OF them reile sting
strongly and adversely upon the church
of which I have the honor to be a mem
Der, that I feel &c duty 70 offer the fol-
lowing corrections to the journal in which
Che errors appeared.
It is not true that elder c.. w. Penrose
gave testimony as stated IN The Herald
Every word uttered in the great tab
crnacle ls an unWritten law for the daily
guidance of the Latter-day Saints. unless
publicly denied by the heads of the
church"
The annexed paragraph. which APP
peared I'm The Herald account. IS positive
ly false. and nothing Of the kind was
stated, either In the direct or the cross
examination. nor was any question pro-
pounded which would lead 60 such an an
swer. The report said;
MIR. Penrose admitted that people
sealed for eternity only and agreeing be
Tore the ceremony is performed not ~
live together might. after the sealing
process. cOhablt and the relationship
would not be considered unlawful I'm the
eyes of tne church. There is no law IN
the church. either written or unwritten
according TO che testimony Of the elder
which prevents person being sealed Tor
eternity cOhabiting and then taking an
other wife or husband
Not only IS il untrue that anything like
witness but IL is entirely az variance
with the doctrines and practice of the
church. The following statements are
when asked what he meant by eter-
nifty. 10 limit its boundaries De said eter-
nifty has always existed and viii continue
TO exist forever and forever.
after considerable denomination
and objections. Attorney n. v. Jones,
for Mrs. Hilton. ELECTED the information
from the witness that there are no writ
sealing ceremonies
The witness stated that the sealing
ceremonies were not published by the
church. but said nothing about whether
they were written or uuwritten. Il is not
true as stated in The Herald, that ne
was almost impossible while Elder Pen
rose was on the witness stand to get di-
rect answer from him" The court rec
ord will show that the answers given
were. In most instances. direct and al
ways SO when the question was direct
Some of the questions were put In such q
form that II was impossible 70 answer
them by a simple yes or no. An
other glaring iraccuracy in the report is
this
But he admitted. however. that the
scaltngs under that revelation prior 70
1850 were binding. If the contracting par
ties were so Inclined
Here is another absolutely untrue state
ment in the report.
''He went on 60 say that sermon be
comes law as soon as uttered and con-
tinues to stand as such until repudiated
The following paragraph is Of the same
character as others quoted herein ana
conveys ideas that are false and that
were never entertained or expressed 10y
the witness:
.By a long course Of examination. with
( many objections interpOlated by AttOr-
ney Stewart. Attorney Jones induced the
witness to make the admission that when
! a couple are sealed IL is optional with
Z them. before the ceremony is performed,
whether they are to live together or not.
md ala hnr hnfn rFn|
after the ceremony has been performed
and cOhabit. their relations, IN the eye
of the church and under the laws. would
not De unlawful. lie also brought out
the intimatiOn that a man or woman
sealed for eternity could marry BY the
state laws"
1 pass by a number of other misstate-
ments in the report, as many or them
are personal and 7 do not care TO notice
| those that relate to me individually. ]
am DESTROYS only Of correcting that which
Is set forth in The Herald as church doc
trine coming from me. / viii not say
that the reporter has wilfully distorted
my evidence Possibly he did not under
stand the subject under consideration.
! One thing is observable. and that is that
my testimony in the direct examination Is
entirely omitted from the report. and
which. If 1t had appeared, would have
I thrown light on the CrOss-eXarn ination
and saved The Herald from publishing
+ the misstatements that have appeared in
Z it's columns.
.
animation and crOss-eXaminatiOn was
I that I'm the Mormon church there are seal
I ings for time only. others for time and
eternity, and others for eternity only
Z The right of persons sealed for time only,
or for time and eternity, to cOhabit in the
marriage relation. was stated. but The
Herald report that sealings for eternity
only entitled the parties 20 marital CO.
/ habitatiOn I'm this life is positively in
/ correct and misrepresents the church
/ it's doctrines and practices and the testi-
D d. n
! the report that There is no law fin the
/ church. either written OF UuWritten. dc-
I Cording 90 the testimony of the elder
1 which prevents "a person being sealed 1OI
] eternity cOhabiting and then taking an
! other wife or husband was never made
; I'm court and is absolutely wrong.
] To is difficult to refrain from denOunc-
I ing this assertion as OutrageouSly and
/ maliciOusiy false. intended to misrepre-
J sent both the witness and the Mormon
! church No reference was made I'm th5
I court to the marrying of another wife
] or husband" That is a sheer invention
/ on your reporter. That MORMON seal
/ ing for time and eternity between cOmpe-
! tent persons is a legal marriage, and
/ therefore justifies marital Capitalization
/ is obvious. and has been so declared by
] the supreme court of itan- The Ques'
| tiCns ard answers in the crOss-eNamina
/ ton. as the records will show referred
| to a sealing or marriage for time ane
/ eternity when the question Of cOhablta
] ton was brought forward.
/ Trusting that you viii do me the JUS
D tiCe and courtesy Of publishing this let
I ter, I am, your very truly,
\ CHARLES W PEN8OSl.