Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1906-01-25
NEITHER LEGAL NOR MORAL.

A preacher In York. Pennsylvania.
writes to the Daily Gazette Of that city.
compllmentlng the Mayor upon "the re-
cent summary expulsion from the city
oftwo Mormon missionaries We do not
know anything Of the particulars under
which this expulsion" took place, but
the preacher considers "the imperative
duty OF their removal most delightful
and enviable privilege In what light
he would have viewed this arbitrary
act as "a delightful privilege" n he had
been the victim instead of the exultant
spectator, we can very easily imagine,
And what sublimely Christian emotions
well up In so intolerant soul would
be Just ms difficult to discern as the 9TH
er Is easy to perceive.
The preacher who publishes his ap-
proval OF the action IF the mayor adj
mIts that It will naturally arouse
controversy IN the minds OF many peo-
pie as to the legal and moral ground
for such action" He appears also to
fear that the missionaries themselves
VIII "endeavor to excite the sympathy
OF all whom they can influence. anu
thereby secure hearing for their mes
sage and an entertainment for them
selves that would have otherwise
been impossible" From these remarks
It would appear that. though expelled
from the city, there was probability
OF better ire tment from people outside
the municipal limits
AS to the legal ground" for the ac-
ton OF the mayor we are not able TO
say very much, not knowing what regu-
latlons may be OF force In that city, nor
on what pretext the missionaries we're
excluded. II they were forbidden sim
ply 10 preach on the streets, that miSht
be according TO civic restrictions which
the mayor would have the right to en-
force. But we do not believe that he
had legal right to expel any person
from the city. and that therefore he ex-
ceeded his authority and could be
brought into legal question for overrid-
ing the power entrusted to him. How
ever It Is we'll enough for our Elders to
yield 10 such arbitrary edicts, rather
than to contest them, at present, either
IN the courts or In any other mannef.
Submission to the law IL required OF
them in the discharge OF their duties.
and they had better suffer wrong than
do wrong.
The jubilant preacher who rejolces
go much in the expulsion of the two
missionaries, endeavors to give some
legal and moral reasons for that act.
The first IL, that II they were preach
ing their doctrines without purse and
scrip In accordance with the require
ments OF the Church." then they were
without visible means Of support re-
they are not thus preaching without
purse and scrip they are false to their
own doctrines and official commission"
That is sample of the logic used by
gentlemen OF his class, when they step
out Of the usual line of their pious pla'
tltudes.
But does II follow that because the
missionaries travel according TO the
plan laid down by the Savior, they
would be always without Visible means
OF support? Suppose that kind friends
voluntarily supply them with the 'vls-
ible means OF support so that they
may have the wherewith to obtain food
and lodging and clothing; would that
be IN opposition to the spirit OF their
commission and mode OF carrying the
Gospel We think not. In the rev.
citation TO the Church concerning this
matter, the Lord said 10 His servant,
going forth without purse or scrip, by
this We shall know my disciples: They
shall feed you and clothe you and give
you money, and he that doeth this shall
IN no wise lose his reward
But II the travelling missionaries hap
pen TO be really without money or food
or shelter, Is Il possible that a minis
ter protesting Christianity would, In
stead OF giving them even cup OF
cold water in the name OF disciple, -
applaud the mayor for turning them
out Of the city, on the ground that they
had mo visible means OF support7' We
can readily understand how he would
have acted if he had lived in Judea
when the first apostles went out, like
sheep among wolves" under the IN
structons Of the worlds Redeemer.
Again, suppose these young men had
money In their pockets and places
where they could lodge, why would
that be in violation OF their own doc.
trines and official commissions" And
II IL were, why should that form rea.
son for their expulsion from the city
The queer reasoning OF some OF those
sectanan pulpiteers is wonderful and
past finding out.
Another point put forth as illegal and
moral ground for the expulsion Of the
missionaries Is, that they are 'proselyt-
ers OF the Christian members Of other
churches" and therefore "they are
dlsturbers OF the peace In the most
fragrant and offensive and Injurious
manner. and deserve not only the re.
striction OF the oivil law but the cen.
sure and condemnation OF the churches
as well as that OF public officials
There Is more logic for you! What law
Is there against proselytIng among any
OF the ao-called Christian" sects and
denominations? What moral objection