Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1904-03-05
made the question more personal. II

made the question more personal lie
said:
You have said, today. that you We're
obeying the laws in not teaching polyg-
amy since the manifesto. Do you thihk
you were obeying the law in having IL
children from different mothers since
| that time?"
II obeyed the law so far as teaching
Is concerned. l have not said that l
have obeyed the law in my practice.
AS I have said before, l preferred 70
| take my chances with the law rather
| than to abandon my plural FANNY.
Polygamy has not been taught IN the
| church by any of the officials. Inc
church has obeyed the laws even II
have not" said Mr.. Smith.
| Reference had been made many
| times to the revelation commanding
plural marriages, and Senator Foraker
said that although the ground may
have been covered before he would IKE
to have go in the record an answer TO
this question: when, where and now
was the injunction in favor of poiyg-
amy received by the church? What L
want to know is whether the practice
Is arbitrary or merely permissive."
Mr.. Smith explained that the reve-
Iation was made to Joseph Smith. Jr..
at Nauvoo in 1S43, but was not publicly
proclaimed on account of the disturb
ance against Smith, which had made
him martyr.
The doctrine, he said, had been taught
by Joseph Smith to Brigham Young
and his associates and preserved by
Young 1t was taken to the Salt Val
ley in 134s and in 1852 was proclaimed
by Young and accepted as q revelation.
Does that answer your question:?
asked Mr.. Smith.
| 1T answers as to when and where
but in order to how" said Senator For
aker. What l want to know is wheth-
er the members of the church Were
compelled to practice the polygamous
| marriages, and if that is true, why it Is
that only three or four per cent. of the
MOrmonS have practiced what has beer
declared to be Divine command"
MI Smith called for n copy of the
book of doctrine and covenants anG
read a part of the revelation, which, he
| said, had been accepted in the nature
of permission to take plural wives anC
was not mandatory upon the member:
of the church. Other passages from
, the same revelation were read partiCu
larly the portions which described tht
. manner of taking more than one wife
1t was set forth that if one wanted t.
espOuse II second virgin he could dc
so by obtaining the consent of the first
but that if the consent of the first wa:
withheld, he was at liberty to proceed
without it. 1t is set forth also tina
where the first refuses to consent t.
share her husband with another woman
she would be destroyed
Senator Pettus asked the meaning O.
the word destroyed" in that sense
| Mr.. Smith answered that she would bt
destroyed by the Lord. but that he Wa:
not informed Just how the Lord would
go about it,
Then it does not mean that the
husband could destroy herr" Senator
Pettus asked.
No, never"
Il take it then that the question o.
getting n wife's consent to marry agar
might just as we'll be eliminated en-.
tirely?" said Senator Beveridge.
Just as WE'LL" answered the witness
Senator Overman asked Mr.. Smith il
he knew any one of the six pOlymagis
apostles had disobeyed the law in re-
gard to poIygamous cohabitation since
the manifesto of 1890.
II do not know" said Mr.. Smith. %
only know that they We're in the same
status of polygamy at the time of the
manifesto as l was myself. l do moi
pry into their family affairs. l an
happy to say that l am not 4 'spottel
or an 'informer.' l am not a paid spy
yet sou might know without being
a paid spy" persisted Senator Over
man. II know nothing about it. AS ]
have said before 1 am not spotter OF
informer." answered the witness.
The words "spotter'' and "informer'
We're Kissed rather than spoken.
Neither am l Il paid spotter or in
former retorted Senator Overman.
Yet l know that in my town people
have children. 1 think you might an
swer that question without using the
words 'spotter' and 'informer' in that
manner"
Il beg the senator's PARDON" the
witness responded.
Senator Dubois asked several 1ues-
lions directed to determine the cor
rectness of the statements that not
more than or per cent. Of the Nor
mons We're pOlygamists and said he be-
lieved he could show that a greater
per cent. than that had been convicted
OF the charge. He asked Mr.. Smith
how many of his predecessors had been
monogamists and Mr.. Smith said he
believed that all of them had had plu-
raj wives.
And 1 believe you said that your
successor to the throne has more than
one wife," said Senator Dubois
| Il wish to correct the senator" re-
sponded Mr.. Smith. There is no Sic
cessor to the throne
Senator Dubois fixed the manner Of
succession and said he would withdraw
the offensive term: that he merely
wanted to ascertain that the successor
has been determined upon and that he
is now polygamist. The witness adj
initted that was the case
In quoting from the New Testament
Senator Hoar said it is stated that
there Is a command fhof q ..h;..