The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1903-06-24
InexpIicabIe State of Affairs
Among PrOteStantS
CONSIDERING THE PAST
When Utah Was Admitted to
Union Without Objections

been thrown by the prospect that Reed
Smoot VIII he allowed to keep his seat
in the United States senate without a
struggle is inexplicable, in view Of the
comparative quiet with which the admis-
sion Of Utah as d state was accepted
seven years ago. The chief complaint
against SnOot seems TO be that he is in
sympathy with" an ecclesiastical oreani-
zation for many years chiefly known
for its recognition Of polygamy as a
divinely ordained institution. II any
church organization, in adopting resolu-
tons on this subject has charged M
6moot with living still in polygamous
relations, it has escaped attention here
But what was there to expect Of Utah
when she came into the Union?
Utah was acquired, as a preliminary to
admission as d state, to adopt a COnsti-
tuition which should be satisfactory to
congress. Apprehension was widespread
that unless some distinct reference TO
polygamy We're made in the Constitution.
the legislature OF the new state would
enact laws recognizing polygamy as a
defensible if not an obligatory practice;
and in order to avoid temporary trouble
on that score the Constitution makers in
serted pair Of guarantees:
a. Nor shall any church dominate the
state, or interfere with its functions"
O. 'PolygamoUs or plural marriages
are forever prohibited"
The former Of these guarantees was
doubtless reminiscent Of a controversy
then four years old. The Utah commits
upon the good faith Of the church Of Lat
ter Day Saints. charging that at every
election held in Utah since the enact
ment Of the Edmunds anti-poygamy law.
many persons barred by that law for
polygamy and kindred sexual onenses
had demanded the right to register and
10 vote; that the purpose Of the law
enacted by Congress assigning TO the
commission the duty Of supervising cleo
toral privileges was 10 put an end to
alleged abuses Of power by the Mor-
mons OF the Territory; that the Mormons
had regularly besieged Congress with a
lobby, misrepresenting the condition Of
things in Utah, and in this way checking
the operation of the machinery for up
roofing polygamy, although the church
will OF the United States government and
changing front on the subject Of polyg-
amy. nevertheless the revelation on plural
marriage had not been eXpunged from
the Book of Doctrines and Covenants,
nor had the countless arguments in it,
favor been withdrawn from the hands
of the people or their teachers; and that
the political autnority of the church was
still exerted coercively upon the people
in allegiance to it. At a Mormon con-
ference held soon after this report was
published. the following resolution was
adopted:
That we deny most emphatically the as
sertion of the commission that the church
dominates its members in political mat
ters and that church and state are unit
ed. Whatever appearance there may have
been in past times of a union of church
and state. because men holding ecclesias-
teal authority were elected TO civil Office
by popular vote. there is now no founda-
ton or excuse for the statement that
church and state are united in Utah, or
that the leaders of the church dictate the
members in political matters; that no CO.
ercion or influence whatever of an eccle-
siastical nature has been exercised owed
US by our church leaders in reference to
which political party we shall join. and
that we have been and are perfectly free
10 unite with any or no political party we
shall join as we may individually elect
As between the commission and the
Mormons, the then governor, Arthur L.
Thomas. sided with the Mormons. insisted
- 81.
up to the new light which had dawned
upon them. So the first of the guarantees
was designed TO set at rest any doubt
which might still linger in the minds of
the outside public as to the merits of the
quarrel of 1881 and later
The second 81 the guarantees was
adopted with view to closing the mouth
Of criticism EXCEPT where in isolated in
stances. the critic might be prepared 10
prove his case atfirmatiyeIy. To any one
asserting that the NIormons had gone
back 70 their polygamous practices. it
would be necessary only 20 cite the con-
stituuousl prohibition as proof that the
people OF the Territory were out OF sym
patty with anything OF that sore. and
that the local laws and courts could not
-
any way. Nevertheless. there We're a few
voices raised in the east 20 sound q warn
ing that not even state constitution
was proof AGAINST amendment Among
these We're the voice Of the New York
Evening Post. which reminded its read
eTs that the admission of Utah would
raise once more the old question whether
= condition can Pee imposed ry cong. -
upon the admission OF a state which VIII
have any -esal effect after 1t has become
q member OF The juioo. 10 WAS recalled
that when Mississippi wished 90 be adj
United in reconstruction times. congress
enacted q pledge that It's constitution
should newer be 81 amended or changed
as q deprive any ciazan cor class Of ctti-
Eens OF The United States II Ihe .ieh- 10
vote who are entitled 90 vote by rhe con-
sutution herein recognized. except rs a
punishment Tor such crimes as are Ssi51-
les a common law. whereof they shah
have been duly convicted under laws
equally applicable O. au the inhabitants
O. said state. In tho cas-. " I-tah.
COuEress imposed as a condition @ con-
srtu,ionl assurance ot re-ieiaus liberty
and prohioiuon ~ poiyEamcus marriages.
Both Mississippi and Utah accepted the
conditions. not because thtsa were liked.
bCt because there was 20 a-hor Way -
getting into the Union. and The acts Of
adm .s>ion IN ccah case provided FOR the
admission OF the state ION an equal foot
inE with the original states" What was
that footing? The original states had
the right 20 impose any SORT q electoral
al