The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1910-05-11
THE key" FOR PLURALITY.

As noted in local item printed
In Tuesday mornings s issue of The
Tribune, Elder Joseph E. TAYLOR called
at this office on Monday and made a
statement III denial of certain recitals
printed In another local article in this
paper on Sunday morning. Incidentally
he verbally reiterated his challenge
that we could not prove that Joseph
+, Smith, president of the Mormon
church, ever sanctioned a polygamous
marriage that has been performed
within the Mormon church since 1890
In his denial Elder TAYLOR said
there was no marital relation, either
legal, plural or otherwise between me
and the said r, $. Davis 1T is noted
that Mr. Taylor does not consider a
plural marriage TO be a legal one,
otherwise he would have made no dis.
tinction. AS we understand the con.
tentIon that he has made heretofore, il
is not that there have been no polyga.
nous marriages in the Mormon church
since the manifesto of 1890, but that
none of these has been approved or
sanctioned by President Smith His tacit
admission of the illogality of these
unions necessarily includes a copfcs-
sion that the issue of them is lille
gltimatc. Therefore, according to his
view, the Mormon church must be over
run with illegitlmacy in the matter Of
polygamous offspring. 1t is fearful
condition TO contemplate, and IN its
presence the matter of approval OF sane.
tion sinks. into comparative unim.
portancc.
lnasmuch, however, as Elder Tsvlor has
again personally raised the matter of au
thorltative appreciation of polygamy, we
do not mind going into it briefly. On
pages 4b4 and 465 of the Doctrine and
Covenants (Which include part of the
revelation on the eternity of the mar.
rage covenant, including plurality of
wlves'D we find positive designation
of the one individual who has the sole
power to sanction polvgamous mar
riages, The book credits The Lord with
saying, 81 have appointed unto my
servant Joseph to hold this power in
one on the earth at a time, on whom
this power and the keys Of this priest
hood are conferred - From Joseph this
authority passed TO Brigham Young;
from Brigham to John Taylor; from
} ohm TO Wilford Woodruff; from Will |
tord to Lorenzo Snow; from Lorenzo
can not be evaded, under the church
law, not even by saving that such |
polygamous ceremonies have been per.
formed under consent given by apostles |
without tho direct knowledge Of the |
president Of the church. Necessarily |
these apostles could not give consent
If authority to do so had not been dele,
gated to them by the only man on |
earth who could delegate thar author
lty--meaning, at the present time. 10.
seph +, Smith Even if the power |
had been conferred by some proceed. |
ing president. Mr.. Smith would have
the right to revoke it, If he has not |
done this then he is responsible. and
if he can be held responsible he can
De said to approve. There is no other
way out of it, because Joseph F. Smith
could stop the practice altogether within
a week If he honestly desired to do So
That he has not done this is the best !
evidence that he wants il to go on
and wanting 1t 10 go on is the best |
proof that he approves.
Now, as To this latest matter in
which Elder Joseph f. Taylor appears
TO have been concerned with the late
Rachel S. Davis, the wording of his
denial would leave to us the conclusion
that Mr.. TAYLOR may prefer to have
il said that IL was simply case of
living ''sealing. In which event, VIC
fail to see wherein he can object to
indeed, under church law, his wife.
We might discuss the matter with
Elder Taylor along this line, out what
would be the use? He would no more
play fair in that than he has done in
the matter of his offered rewards for
have given publicity, in complete full.
fllment of his conditions. LII the recent