The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1910-03-22

Concerning that alleged "tacit un-
derstanding" that polygamists in Utah
should not be molested, the Deseret
News had the following to say edi-
torlally on last Saturday evening;
The, antiMormon sheet. anxious to
provide Its readers little variety Of
reading. tolls them that the News no
longer holds that there was "a tacit un-
derstaandng,' This is another one made
understanding that existing relations
should not he disturbed. as long as new
plural marriages were not contracted by
the authority Of the church. That is the
truth. And IL remains true In spite of
dcnials. And the News has not changed
position on that subject, one inch,
But Tho Tribune did not say that
the News did not now "hold" to that
view The church organ, for instance,
holds" that polygamy is a God given
principle, and it ''holds" that its prac-
tice is therefore and necessarily right
eousness, but it does not say so. The
News ''holds' great many views
concerning what it considers TO be
Mormon church rights, but it does not
voice them. There is vast difference
between what the News "holds' and
what it utters. What The Tribune did
say, on the Thursday morning preced-
ling last Saturday was that there was
a time when the church organ contin-
ually Fharped" upon tho subject, and
continued, "It no longer mentions the
polygamous invention concerning a
tacit understanding, because it has
long ago failed to make good its case,"
for the reason that it has omitted to
mention who, aside from polygamists,
were parties to the supposed "silent"
agreement. The Tribune did not say
anything about the view "held" by
the News on this subject, but referred
TO the fact that for long time it had
SAID nothing concerning it. And we
were right; for until this recent ut.
terance we believe the News has not
mentioned the supposed "tacit under
standing" since Apostle Editor Charles
w, Penrose (who was first to bring the
matter into the News) left for his Eu-
ropean mission,
The News brings forward the asser-
tion that the Enabling Act made no
reference to unlawful coha abitation, and
sets that forth as evidence of "tacit
understanding that existing poIyga-
nous marriage relations should not be
disturbed. But it admits that in that
document polygamy is expressly for
bjdden. We submit that polygamous
living is a part of the practice Of
polygamy; if it were not there would
never have been any old polygamy,
and there would be no new polygamy
now, for the simple reason that it is
the act of polygamous living that graf
ifes polygamous lust-not the mere
ceremony of polygamous marriage. The
attitude Of the News on this point is
as weak as that of any it maintains
on this subject in its entirety. 1t is
the contention in the church that mar
riage has not become complete mar
rage until "consummated, and con-
summation Of polygamous marriage is
possible only under polygamous liv-
ing, The latter is the object and is
consequently the most important fea-
ture of polygamy. So that when the
Enabling Act forever prohibited polyg-
amy, the chief object Of polygamy was
naturally included in the inhibition.
| 1t is plain that the Enabling Act, upon