The Madison daily leader. [volume] (Madison, S.D.) 1890-current, 1904-03-04
SMITH OF THE NOR
MON CHURCH ADMITS vIO-
LATION OF THE LAW.
STANDS READY TO FACE CHARGES
PREFERS TO SUFFER PENALTY
RATHER THAN ABANDON
PLURAL FAMILIES.

washington, March ST IeSlucHt
Smith of the Mormon church resumed
the stand at the opening of the days
session of the Smoot hearing. Mr..
Tavler, for the prosecution, asked
number of questions which brought
out statement from Mr.. Smith re-
garding his own position under the
laws covering polygamy. He acknowl-
edged that he had violated them con-
tinuously since the manifesto OF 1890
and is ready now and always had
been ready to face the laws OF the
| land Mr.. Tayler asked:
"Is cohabitation with plural wife
contrary To the rules of the church,
Mr.. Smith asked and received per-
mission to make a statement and then
answer the question in his own way.
He spoke with great feeling and direct
ness, saying:
I'm regard TO the status of polygamy
at the time of the manifesto | want To
say that after the hearing before the
master of chancery | understood that
we should abstain from relations with
our plural families and that rule was
act went into effect admitting Utah as
state. Under that act the only pro-
hibition was that plural marriages
should cease. Nothing was said about
cohabtation with our wives
with the wives you had married
previous to the manifesto, you mean"
interrupted Mr.. Hoar.
Plural Marriages Forbidden.
THAT is what | meant" said Mr..
Smith. Il understood that plural mar
riages were 10 cease and ever since
the manifesto until the present time
there never has been a plural mar
riage in the church performed In ac-
cordance with its teachings or with
the conniyance of the church and, he
added with greater emphasis, Il know
whereof | speak
Then in answer to the question
whether polygamous cohabitation was
regarded by the church as contrary
to the law he answered: 1t was.
Continuing, he said: This was the
case and is the case now"
But | was placed in this position
said Mr.. Smith, Il had a family-a
plural family, ii you please. | married
my first wife more than thirty eight
years ago ana my last wife more than
twenty years ago. By these wives
have had children and have preferred
to take my own chances with the law
and suffer any consequences the Ia"
might visit upon me rather than aban-
don these children and their mothers.
II have continued to cohabit with
them since the manifesto OF 1890 and
they have borne me children since
that date | was fully aware OF what
was doing | knew | was amenable
to the law, but, as | say, | preferred 10
face that situation rather than to de-
sert them. | have not cohabited with
the two wives openly or tiaunted the
fact, but ] have acknowledged these
wives and children as my family.
Utah People condone offense.
"The people of Utah have regarded
the situation as an existing fact. These
people as a rule are broad minded
and liberal in their views and have
condoned the offense-if offense II is
rather than interfere with my sit
uation As they found it. 1t has been
known what | have been doing.
have not been interfered with nor
disturbed in any way. If | had been
| was there to answer the charges.
was willing to face them and submit
to the penalty, whatever 1T might be.
Mr. Dubois then asked Mr.. Smith II
IL was not understood by those in au-
thority that it was the duty OF the
polygamist to continue TO PROVIDE Tor
and support his plural family after the
manifesto of 1880.
Mr. Smith answered that it was
generally so understood.
Resuming the inquiry concerning
Mr.. Smiths personal polygamous rela-
tions Mr. Tayler asked:
How many children have you had
since the manifesto Of 1902
Mr.. Worthington objected on the
part OF the defense and both Senator'S
Beyeridge and Foraker said that they
thought, as the witness had said his
wives had borne children since the
manifesto, it made no difference how
many such children had been born to
him.
Tayler insists on the Question.
81 contend that it does make a diff
ference" said Mr.. Tayler. 1t makes
q difference how we'll the fact was ad-
vertised that he was violating the
law. Ii makes a difference whether
his example might have upon others
In the church"
Mr.. Burrows asked Mr.. Smith IL he
had married any wives between the
first and the last that he had men,
toned during his statement TO the
committee.
Il have" said Mr. Smith.
How many?"
Three"
"Then you have five wives now?"
said Mr. Burrows.
That is correct was the response.
Mr.. Burrows ruled that the question
oh bSected TO was in order and directed
the stenographer TO read the question.
How many children have you had
since the manifesto OF 1902 was
read.
..L,lo,...n rinca 1S4n y said Mr.. Smith.