The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1906-06-12

S~-N
Mr wor,hinston. 1t was given to you
| the traditional oath OF the temple WIS Il
| not?
Mr.. Lawrence. II was given TO me to use.
| Carlisle that there Is doubt that the lnn-
guage OF tho covenant was varied from time
| other form than that you havo told us about?
MT Lawrence Yes. l WIN explain that.
| that of1ciated at different times, and from
what ] had heard they had changed IT III
| man would administer II n little different
Mr WorthIng,on- You know that by hear
Mr. Lawrence know that by hea-say
only q: ILL., ll2)
Mr. worthngton. Referring to this cere-
| mony. ond the covenant Of vengeance, as IL
is called. do you remember In that connection
whether there any passage In the Book
OF Revelations OF the Bible?
| Mr.. Worthington Whnt is that?
Mr Lawrence That Is used in connection
| Mr. Worthington. Can you give us tho
vcrso and chapter. OF Revelation?
Mr Lawrence ] think II is chapter from
| ls taken from Revelations. II Is simply
ferred to VIII answer that that quotation
Mr.. worthington Was It not part Of the
teaching Of the church: when you were con-
| nccted With Il. that tho Constitution of tho
| United States is inspired documcnt7
Mr. Lawrence Yes, sir. Do you wont an
| Mr.. Worthington. I have oil the answer
cnn have sir II there is anything you wish
| testimony. you have that privilege. provided
| It Is not n speech Let me read the ninth
md md tenth verses OF the sixth chapter OF
Mr.. Lawrence How long Oh. Lord7" II
| is Just quotation
| Mr. Worthington. I will road tho two. and
SEQ II those two verses either OF them
orc the ones to which you refer:
| And when he had opened tho NTH zeal I
| saw under the altar tho eOulr NJ
| were slnin by the Word OF God. and by the
testimony which they held
| And they cried with n loud voice saying
How long oh Lord. Holy and true dost thou
not Judge and avenso our blood on them that
Mr. Lawrence. That is part of IT In con-
| nection with this
| the whole OF II. Just show us oil that was
| referred to In your ceremony thorc.
MT Lawrence, How long. Oh Lord. Holy
Mr. worthington "Doet thou no, Judge and
| ovense our hlocd on them that dwell on the
Mr. Lawrence. think that was the part
eonneetSa M, N1r With it-just that part
| az Justification Of the covenant in con
ncction with II?
Mr. Lawrence. Tint was used rs a justi
hcation of the obligation.
| The Chairman. Hc did not soy justi-
| ncntion OF the covenant.
| Ar Lawrence. I said that was used as a
lnstiiication OF tho obligation a. 115. u7)
II Will be seen that all three OF these
| witnesses fatty contradicted what seems
to be the theory OF the protestants, that
promise on the part OF the party going
| through the ceremony hostile TO the
| united states or an appeal TO the AL
| mighty to inf1ict punishment on the Ma
| tion,
The other witness on the point now un-
der consideration is w. N. Wolfe. He
| endowment house no less than twelve
| times, the first time being In May 1894
and the last time in October, 1902. His ex-
animation on this subject then proceeded
| as follows:
Mr.. Carlisle. VIII you stnte to the commit
| tee whether there s. part OF the cerc-
| monies In tho temple. any oath administered?
Mt Wolfe. There several oaths od-
Mr.. Carlisle, Con you state what they are?
MI Wolfe There is an oath OF chastity,
or. might say. covenant or lava law OF
sacrifice and law OF vcngance.
Mr.. Carlisle. When you sny n law OF ven
| geance what do you mean? Do you mean
that there is any promise or pledge 10 ayenee
| wrong. or do you mean simply that there
rs some law read TO you or somo rule read
Mr.. Wolfe. There Is no covenant or aerca
| mont on the part OF any individual to ayenge
Mr, Carlisle Just state to the committee
| what II ls
Mr. Wolfe. The law OF vengeance Is this,
You and each OF you do covenant and prom
lro, lso that you viii pray and never cease TO
| inc prophets upon this nation and that von
| VIII VIII teach tho Same 10 your children and your
| Gnliurens children unto tho third and fourth
says: an bow your heads and say say esFs! 'Yes.e"
Mr Gorllsle Was that done?
! Mr. Wolfe. 1t done.
| Senator OYcrman Was that done eycr,,
| time. or Just time? S
M Mr, woIe II was dono every time I went
Mr. Wolfe. for several years. and up to
January ia ,h i9st, was one of the professors
| In the brigham Young College at I,o-
| gan, Il Mormon lnStitntlon
on cToss-eNamlnation whether charges Of
drunkenness nIlA. ness had not been preferred
against him in the institution he said
| that no such charges had been made to
his knowledge, but that such charges
might have been preferred against him
! Upon being asked what he meant h,,
saying that such charges might have bae1
| preferred against him, he answered thot
no meant that he had made himself La
sbly S twentv nf eVSpges Vsags i9r "a period of pos
IL re admitted that certain officers of the
institution had had conversations with
n nm 81 IN % regard to his habit of drinking
| +Eo) He admitted that he had been RE
| Guired TO resign his position in .Januar,
last; but claimed that this was done be-
cause about that time he had given no
lice that he would no longer pay tithine
lie admitted that officers of the institr
| ton had made objection to his habits of
ertnk,ng cruising put put said that they had never
| suggested his removal, or the desrabllity
! OF his resignation until he had refused
to pay tlthes. a; 26).
rs TO NolIe testimony, the respondent
| onered considerable testimony In rehut
tai. one of the witnesses on this subject
was James H Linford. the president OF
Brlgham Young College. He testified fully
| as to Wolfe's habits of drinking for n con,
siderable period prior to the time he was
compelled to resign; and testified in SUBJ
stance that Wolfe's resignation was NOT
demanded on account of his refusing to
pay tithcs. but because his habits ~
drinking had grown on him so that II
was was no longer possible to allow him to
retain his position. g.: 25l 27D
Ihers was also filed on behalf of the
respondent the affidavit of Joseph =
Carbon, the bishop OF the ward ar I.o.
gan, In which Wolfe lived. This affidavit
WAS admitted as evidence by consent of
counsel FOR the protestants and by leave
or the committee. In this affldavit tho
witness contradicts what Wolfe stated in
ms testimony with reference to a conver-
sation with the witness on the subject OF
tithng. u
Wolfe was also contradicted. in a very
witnesses. He had Droferra6 cba roaa