Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1904-02-13


In the next world II she be sealed for
eternity to some good man, TO which
she assented. In casting about the sac
rife fell upon John X. Park. A mes
senger was sent to him and he came
10 the house in which the plaintiff lie
sick. Before entering into the sick room
he was informed as to the condition OF
the plaintiff, and being assured that the
plaintlff would certainly die he consent
ed that he would be sealed to the plain
tin for eternity only, AS he entered
into the sick room the plaintiff seemed
10 be In sinking. unconscious or semi
conscious condition and made no OBJ
servable response In the performance OF
the ceremony, and no audience was held
between the plaintiff and Mr.. Park
prior to the ceremony.
The witnesses, Hannah Wells and
Lucy Young were both present as
and heard the words spoken and saw
what was done, and both refused to
repeat or state the words spoken or
the acts done by the plaintiff or by
John r. Park, or by Daniel II. Wells in
the ceremony. In each instance the
refusal was not based upon want Of
recollection but solely upon the obli-
cation they respectively owed the
Church, IN that the ceremony was Sc
cret and sacred to the Church and not
a matter of public concern.
Mr., Penrose in defining the doctrine,
covenants and ordinances and the mar
riage or sealing for eternity practised
Hereunder by the members Of the
Church, refused TO state the words said
or the things done by the participants
that constituted the ceremony, for the
reason that they were sacred secrets
TO the Church and were never diyulged.
SEALING CERTIFICATE.
TIL sealing certificate is as follows.
John Rockey Park, born Tiiiln,
Seneca, ohio, May 1888"
ANNE Flora Armitage, born Not
tnghlll, London, 10 February, 1853"
THE above parties were sealed by
President ID. II. Wells in the presence
OF Emeline Free Young, at her resi-
dence In Salt Lake City U. IT, Decem-
Der. D, 1872. The lady being on her sup
posed death bed.
DANIEL II. WELLS
But on the other hand the plaintiff
In her testimony attempt to give in
detail the ceremony, the words used by
the officiating priest and the rejoinders
both Of Mr.. Park and herself; wherein
Mr.. Park was asked II he. John II,
Park, would take Annie +, Armitage
to be his lawful and welded wife and
TO her, II she would take John X. Park
e.. IA, H., idr a "a oIA.,,, a
and her response Yes" whereupon the
officiating priest pronounced them hus-
band and wife for time and eternity.
DID NOT DIE.
Contrary to the expectations Of the
participants and the attending friends
Miss Armitage, the plaintiff did not
die, but shortly thereafter recovered
her accustomed health. John h. Park
being silent as TO the relations that
obtain between husband and Wife the
plaintift sought ana inquired Of him as
TO what their relations were and he in
formed her that In so far as they be-
ing married that was impossible. That
he had an impeachment that prevented
him from ever being married the ma
ture of which It would not be proper for
young woman like her to know and
that he would give her divorce, which
is as follows,
That We, the under signed, John II. Park
and Annie, his wife, before her mar
riage 10 him Annie Armitage, do here
by mutually covenant. promise and
agree to dissolve all the relations which
have hitherto existed between us as
husband and wife, and to Keep our
selves separate and apart from each
other from this time forth
In witness whereof We have here
unto set our hands az Salt Lake City,
u. T., this 10Th day of March, 1873,
(Slgned) JOHN r. PARK.
"ANNlE FLORA PARK
Signed IN the presence of d. Mcken'
Sie, James Jack
ADMITTED NON-MARRIAGE.
After the ceremony and the plain
tins recovery she. In discussing the
affair with some of her female 0c-
guaintancCs, stated that she was not
married TO Mr.. Park, but only sealed
10 him for eternity She was called and
went by the name OF Annie Armltage
and did not assume or take the name
of Park. but held herself out TO the
community as a single person, until the
year 1875, when she and William Hilton
were married. And that they ever
since have been and are now husband
and Wife
Ii win be observed that there was no
hesitation on the part OF the plalntin
reproducing the ceremony In its en-
tlrely, but that Mrs, Wells and Mrs,
Young refused to do so. because Of
their obligation to the Church not TO
reveal It, Also Mr. Penrose refused
TO state the sealing ceremony because
Il was sacred secret OF the Church
ana was never diyulged, This Is Pc
cuIar. II the sealing ceremony IL
as the plaintiff states II to be, | cannot
ascrIbe any reason why either Mrs.
Wells or Mrs. Young would have re-
fused 10 state the same In evidence, II
IN fact Il did exist And the same may
be said as TO the refusal OF Mr.. Penrose
TO state what the sealing ceremony OF
the Church FOR eternity only was My
opinion Is that the plaintiffs memory
IL at fault. Mr. Preston, upon an eS-
animation Of the certificate OF the cere-
mony, that In accordance with the doc.
trne and usuages Of the Mormon"
Church IN such matters the ceremony
was a sealing for eternity only, because
the certificate contained the statement
death bed" He also examined the so
called divorce and explained that such
was usually given In like cases, where
the parties desired Il, That the two
taken together did not constitute the
ordinary marriage, That the ceremony
was a sealing for eternity and the d.
vorce dissolved that relation. The sub
ject being wholly spiritual, and having
! nothing, whatever. 10 do with things