The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1907-06-10
Continued from Page One

that nIuraJ marriages arc new marriages
or at least that there have been p9!Sst
amous marriages. since ,ne w Woopru, connn
help but believe that these gentlemen arr
not quite candid with reference To thu
subject l do not believe that in IN
church or out Of the church, that doe!
not believe that the Church OF Jesu:
the practice OF plural marriages in thu
church I believe that everybody Is set
tied In his conviction IN relation TO that
matter
proclamation is flrsr issued, differences oi
opinion and Interpretation almost neceS
sarlly arise concerning matters of tins
description, and when the announcement
was made In President Woodruffs man,
itesto OF the discontinuance OF plura!
marriages and the advice was given iha'
no marriages contrary to the law, the
question arose in the minds OF some
whether that was not confined 10 mar
'Ilages within tho United States. and II
marriages or this kind was ahstained
from within the United States. whether
that did not fulfill the covenants and the
the matter was discussed, Ultimately.
however, the conclusion was inevitable
that the manifesto forbade marriages in
all the world. plural marriages. so far
church is not local church. 1t Is not
the Church Of Jesus Christ OF rday
Saints in the United States. but II ie a a
conference speaks. II speaks for tho en-
tire church In all the world. and hence
] say the conclusion was inevitable that
plural marriaes were everywhere for
hidden.
And when men held tenaciously that
that is not the case, but that the church
fulfilled Its agreement and covenant by
abstaining from marrying within the
in. there was but one thing lefi and
that was 10 draw the conclusion that
such persons were out of harmony with
the church and that they should with
draw and tender their designations And
since that time there has been no Ques-
tion In the church as TO where the church
stands on that matter And don't be
lieve that there Is any doubt existing In
the minds OF the. gentlemen who forru-
lated this review on that subject
But again Not only do we think this
subject OF polysamy true. but also-oh, by
the way, there is another item about
that and that is this that complaint is
made that this practice. this matter OF
polygamy, is only abvogeted as a practice
but belief in the divinity OF the principle
is stllI held by the Latter-day Saints.
Belief Their Own Business.
Well gentlemen, what of it? Whose
business is il? DO you hold that you may
enter the sacred precincts Of the mind
and direct opinion Your law gives YOU
the right 10 punish for acts against the
no right TO enter the dominion OF thought
and no right 10 interfere with our holding
to the truth Of that doctrine as an alb
stract principle
Hands or here, Our belief is our own.
We have a right to our opinion. and if
YOU have not succeeded in converting our
minds upon this subject. why. You have
got ali YOU deserve In this matter, be-
cause that is n question which properly
belongs 10 the dominion OF reason and
polemics and YOU should have got US
God and from the nature OF things in
volved that the principle itself was un-
true.
But YOU are NOT content 10 leave II 10
the arbiter OF discussion and reason; YOU
must needs fly 10 The prejudice OF the
world. excite the masses and induce them
to belabor Congress with their petitions
until your inimical legislation WAS put
superior force. not 10 your argument, be-
cause We successfully met those. You
remember the occasion. don't you, OF even
the chaplain of the Senate OF the United
States coming to this forum discussing
that question. and that your chaplain was
In the contest. as is evidenced
from tho fact that we published docu-
ments on both sides OF that question.
So. il YOU have not convinced us OF tho
OF our principles, why, il is
because Of the lameness OF your reasons,
the weakness OF your argument. and YOU
must be content when do not carry
out that principle In which we believe
into practice. And now. here again. The
review asserts that no denial Is made Of
the practice OF polygamous living. They
admit that the official figures show s9I
such men. polygamous, In the year 1902.
and say that the fact that later reports |
are not quoted leads to the reasonable
belief that since that date the number
Of male poygnmists has not diminished
but rather has increased.
II is true that the address brings down |
the figures. not over S9I in 1902, but the /
tl,n,
the number has been considerably di-
minished. eud was the statement made |
upon the floor OF the Senate of the United !
States based on the official figures that /
the number had been reduced TO at least !
500 from 99I. Now. gentlemen, here was !
an opportunity for YOU 10 exercise a 1T |
tie generosity. Instead OF Juggling with
,his so as 10 express your belief that
these cases OF polyGsmous living had in
,reas sed rather than diminished; YOU could |
have called attention 10 what were the !
facts IN the case and that u was said |
upon the floor of the United States Sen
: te that the reduction had heen TO 500 |
and that time would soon obliterate this |
question from our consideration.
AS to Polygamous Living.
Let US touch for moment this ques.
ion Of polygamous living, II Is at least
difficult problem to me. II may be dif- |
1cult for the minds OF some men 70 dis !
the line. the attitude of the address |
II our brethren. and especially the lead |
ng authorities OF tho church. haven't !
'ound any difficulty TO determine what |
their attitude was In the promise. and |
20 understanding their attitude. through |
Interpretation. the meaning of the mani |
fesio has been made 10 cover polyga- |
nous living as well as new marriages. |
and thus concediDg that the law OF tho |
and forbids the continuance OF these re- |
IA ,ione.
And yet in the face OF these hard con- !
]iticns, men have concluded that their |
moral obligations demanded that they |
should be- true TO this relationship into !
which they had entered. You. gentle |
men. do me the honor TO quote sorpa
words Of mine uttered ten years ago !
while in attendance upon Congress and /
while trying 10 maintain a scat that had |
been given me by Nthe suffrance of the !
people Of my State. / wish now 10 re- .
peat them in better form than then be- 1
cause al that time the words that ] |
uttered were somewhat garbled-not BIZ |
YOU, for i presume YOU have quoted them |
correctly. hut by him who reported them
not Intentionally think, however, viii /
say that FOR him. since he is recently |
dead--not purposcly rlisreported by him
But so far as ! am concerned, | stand /
exactly where ! did ten years AGO, name. ,
Iy. that though the church proclaimed |
against the continuance Of this relation /
shin tnOunh the NJ IA,