Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1906-06-16


lin 1861
The Chalrman-Wlll you state to IN
committee the ceremony In the endow
Inent house2 I do not mean the cere
mony OF marriage: but did you z,
through the endowment house whel
you became an apostle?
Mr. Thatcher-No, sir. II was no
QeCessary.
The ChalTman-You have beer
through the endowment house. then
but Once2
Mr.. Thatcher-Ycs. Sir
The Chaifman-Nin you state TO the
committee the ceremony Of the endow-
ment house?
MI Thaicher-I think, Mr. Chair
man. that ] might be excused on that.
The Chairman-Why?
/ Mr.. Tbatcher-For the reason that
| those we're held 10 be sacred matters
/ and only pertaining to religious vows.
The Chalrman-Are you obligated
! not 10 reveal them?
Mr.. Thatcher-Yes, I think ! am.
The Chairman-What would be the
eject n you should disclose them?
That is, Is there any penalty attached2
Mr. Thaicher-There would be no ef-
feet except upon my own conscience.
The Chairman-That II an?
Nh. Thatcher-That Is an
The Chairman But you are under
obligation as part OF the ceremony
not 90 reveal IT,
Mr. Thatcher-Yes. sir, feel myself
under such Obligation. q ioiS l0lsl
This was an the testimony on the
subject Of the alleged oath or obllga-
ton taken duting the sessions ~ the
committee held On the spring Of 1904
The last session when testimony was
taken during That spring occurred on
the End Of May 1904. When the TAX
INK q testimony was resumed On De-
Cember. 1904 counsel for the protest
ants produced and examined certain
witnesses on This subject the substance
Of whose testimony VIII now be stat
cd.
J. H. Wallis. ST.. who had been
Mormon hut who had formally notified
the bishop ~ his ward. seven or eight
months before he was examined, that
he mo- longer considered himself a
member ~ the Church. testified that
ON several occasions he had taken his |
cndowments I'm the temple at Salt Lake |
that he asa no, know whether ne had |
it exactly right but that the substance |
" the ro-Callcd oath 81 vengeance" /
Is That those who took IL promised and |
vowed that they will never cease 10 1
importunc high heaven ~ avenge the
blood NJ The prophets on the nations
of The earth or the inhabitants n the
Earth re added that u his memory
served him. h. thought that was about
right and that a passage Of Scrip
'uro IS quoted from tho Revelations
'iXth chapter iinth verse, q: iqJ
Tho next dav Mr.. Wallis was recall
a and testified that IN repeating the
obligation he had made p mistake, and
hat no should have said upon this
lation' iu stead ~ upon the inhabii-
lnts Of the earth" q. 14SD
Two witnesses we're called on behalf |
4 the respondent TO impeach Wallis
me of them Moroni Gillespie who
lad been a member Of the police force
n salt Lake city Tor II or IL years
estited that he knew Wallis general
equation for truth and vcracity I'm
he community IN which he lived that
was had. and that he would not
eieve him under oath. Wallis had
astiiiod that he had never been ar
ested
This witness testified that he was
resent IN tho police court on one oc- y
aston when Wallis was under arrest
nd pleaded guilty 90 the charge of =,
runkenness. Gillespie further teSli- !,
ed that he had known Wallis for sew =
raj years. and that IN his opinion. >
2 was not altogether Of sound mind. | f.,
B. 3l7, 31S.) o
The other witness as 70 the yeracity e
Wallis vas William Langton q, >
o22, 3, l43, l4i. Neither his testi- -,
ony nor that Of Gillespie was con- u
addicted or impaired Ia any way. His p
inclusion, from what he had seen Of y
aliis was that the man was crazy. u
further testified that IN his opinion.
aus general reputation for truth u
ID ycracity was such that he would "
i believe him on oath. =
When Langton was asked by counsel 81
the respondent 10 give his reasons III
thinking that Wallis was Of UNI
md mind. objection was made by the or
unset for he protestants and the oh W
tion was sustained g.. l4n. But } ne
)sequently he was recalled and al 81
we'd 10 give his reasons which he VIC
at length % ii5D. ie
August W Lundstrom. another wit I'
- for the protestants testified that ~
mad taken the endowments six q
les, and that the obligation IN ques-
b was. VI
.u.-, lei
We and each Of us solemnly pro- he
'e and covenant that we shall ask
q TO aVenge the blood OF Joseph | II,
I'M upon this nation" G.; ISL. ST.
ie subsequently slightly varies this te'
,cmeut 10y saying that the prayer az
5; We ask God. the Eternal Faith pr
10 ayenge the blood Of Joseph aN
IN upon this nation" g: 1917 .hI
hree witnesses were called on be- 1o'
OF the respondent 10 impeath wa
ldstrom. One Of them, F. 5. Fern ca
nm, testified that he had known uu
idstrom for about II years. and toi
ldstrom's general reputation for u,
d IN the community IN which he
q was bad, and that he. witness. III
ia not believe him under oath on pr
s-eXaminatiOn by counsel for the nlo
,estants the fact was brought out ug
Luudstr5m had borrowed from his
op part N a FUND which the bishop Sa'
collected for the support Of the sN'
r, and that when asked BIZ the STA
op 20 return the money. Lundstrom PIE
sed 10 do It, saving that the Church enc
d him a living (2' 1919 ans
ne ~ these witnesses. c. V. Ander- axe
testified that he knew Lundstrom's cbl
'ral reputation for veraclty IN salt Ios
g City. where he lived that It was WI
and that the witness did not me
X he would believe Lundstrom on the
. CO. 1.0ls) gov
II. Hayward was the third witness WI
his subject. He testified that he the
known Lundsirom for many years. ~
latter having been al ore time IN X
'mploy; that he knew Lundstrom's uau
raj reputation for truth ana yerac- sch'
n salt Lake City where he lived. Citi
Il was bad. and that from HIS tcer
tation the witness would not be- Phi
him under oath. ber
his evidence rs 20 Lundstrom's =
tation for truth and yeracIty was sskl
rebuttcd IN any way otje
a ia a..