Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1904-03-11
IN GOOD FAITH.

The testimony In the case OF Senator
smoot naturally causes much excite
ment In the East, whore the distinction
between two separate and different Of
fences against the law IL not understood,
and where sensational papers stu fur.
ther mystlfy the public by lurid stories,
great eNaggerations and ridiculous car
toons. But there Is no real cause for
any such aglta on at home, and those
papers that toment II are doing the
state no service nor adding TO their own
reputation for anything that Is praise
worthy.
Whatever differences OF opinion may
be reasonably I'D on the questions at
issue ought TO be discussed without
temper and without Misrepresentation
When falsehood Is told In an ,,iGenty
wilful, vicious spirit sharp rejoinder Is
necessary consequence and thus much
gas Is evolved with very little any
light Let propositions and facts h1
set forth fairly. and rational argument
may follow and the truth be made ap.
parent.
As to the ',stlmony concerning the
mode Of lie &, a number Of individuals
who have been named there is
nothing new 70 the people OF
Of Utah. and II Is folly, to say nothing
stronger to pretend that It Is "a new
thing under the sun The charge ot
cohabiting with plural wives was made
both by the Ministerial association and
their echoes, the protestants, 1t was
admitted, frankly in the answer TO the
protest, 9hc charge that any polyga-
nous marriages had been solemnsed
by authority Of the Church or It's lead
crs since the manifesto Of 1890 was de-
,lareo "on information and belief to
be- untrue, The testimony, about which
so much has been said. simply follows
the same line and 81 far nothing Of
any consequence has been adduced 10
the contrary,
Now about the compact agreement,
or whatever II may be called, said 10
have been made with the nation in
ref, renee To statehood There could
not be any compact between the Nor
mon 'hurch or any other church with
the .,ernment Of the United States
concerning statehood The only require.
ment relating to this subject made OF
the people Of Utah by Congress was
that In the Enabling Act, This was that
the constitutional convention should
provide by ordinance. THAT polyga-
nous or plural marriages are forever
prohibited
Obser;cl II was Congress by the
acts Of March g. 1852, and March g.,
1887, that gave the legal definition OF
"polygamy" and the distinctive differ
ence between that, which consisted OF
contracting q plural marriage, and 'un-
lawful cohabitatlon" which wac living
with two or more women as wives.
This distinction was Invariably rccog.
nized by the courts, and by that portion
of the press and the public that were
not ignorant Of the law and the facts,
Utah did not originate the terms. Mel.
ther were they invented by the "Mor.
mon" Church, II was the Congress Of
the United States that gave them per-
Thence aud force,
The Constitutional convention, after
full consideration Of the requirement.
ana with complete understanding OF
the scope and limitation OF the Ian.
guage, compiled with the Enabling Act
by ordinance "irTeyooable without the
consent Of this State" that "Polyga
nous or plural marriages are forever
prohibited, On the passage OF the or.
dinance, which is article 3 Of the Con.