OCR Text |
Show HAVE MORMONS ANY UI CiUTS ! j Tlie .Wit of Salt LaU oily remarks I id relation to the receot trial oi' 11 aw- i kins, the Mormon polypamist, that "the verdict was ruodercd by a jnry f that does not represent I he community, j hut one generally believed to Le ; chosen wilh the special view of secur- ; ; ng verdicts of guilty in a certain class i ' of' cases." Of ihc truth of this there can be no doubt. The Nnc adds: 1 "Hence we maintain that Mr. Hawkins ' was not tried by a jury of his peer?, i but by a jury of his enemies, and that . really the verdict wai in accordanco neiiher with the spirit, the intent, ; nor tho letter of tlie law." To this the Salt Luko TiHiiiw, an anli-Mormon journal, replies: "The court needed an American, not a Mor-: Mor-: nion jury, and a verdict to represent I tlie views of tin American people on marriage and adultery, and not one to l represent the views of the Latter-day 1 .Saiate." In other words, tlie court needed a packed jury, and thy got it. The ; Methodifils, who are hotting this new ' Mormon persecution, needed a Melho-; Melho-; diet judge for their purposes, and they ; got "ono in the person of judge Mo Kcan, who, as we lenrn from the Tn'-I Tn'-I l.une., is the son of a clcrcynian and j ; the brollier of oue. Thtj TriLttif hjl-uis to enU-tlain rather original views on the subject of ; law. If tho "views of the American ! people" are to be taken as (he court's 1 standurd of laws, it, will be interesting to know who is to be tlie aulhorizcd ; compiler and expounder of those I "views." It will also bo interesting lo learn under what authority Mor-I Mor-I mo oh are to be excluded from the I name and tho rights of American citi- zens any more than ShakerSj Sweden-I Sweden-I borgians, Unitarians, or Spiritualists. ; "Hawkioa was not tried by a jury of his peer?; that in to say," remarks the i Tribune, "not by a jury of Mormons, ; but if he trill accept American cithern i a his peers, then waa he tried by his ! peers. " j How long will it be before, under such arrognnt ruling as this, every man who is not a Methodist will be denied tho name and the rights of on American oitizen? We fear that our Methodist brethren have become : unduly inflate 1 by their success in : hunting down one poor Mormon nonconformist non-conformist and subjecting him to a , three year's imprisonment. It was truly stated by Mr. Fitch for I the defence that snch cases an lit: one i at the. bar tauld be made a crime hi I statute laics only. j Now there ib no law of congress on j (he subject of adultery, and this was I fully admitted by judge McKean in bis I charge. There is a law of Utah ! against adultery, but none against ; polygamy, or on tho subject of mar ! riage and this was also fully admitted by the pronccution. Whence ihen does the court derive ita authority in (he Hawkins case? The whole secret is let out by Mr. Maxwell, the proseouting altoruey, who aays: "Tlie common lata of nations on marriage, must goirrn Utah:' Itut is this so? In uuorganizd territories, and in places away from al! jurisdiction, the common law may be, in the nbsence of statute luw, a proper guide in dealing with crimes against property and life. And so lynch law may, in certain cases, be justifiable. lint to say that in a Territory Ter-ritory where statute law exists, and where the whole corumunily who framed the law are implicated in a custom which, though contrary to the common law of certain nations, is not io conllict with the criminal crimi-nal law of the Territory, with the rights of individuals, or with any part of the constitution of the United States, or with the laws of congress to Gay that under such circumstances, the common law of certain nations may be used to crush out and imprison nine-tenths of the inhabitants of the Territory beoause of their polygamy, is a mere lawyer's fiction, wholly without with-out foundation in reason or in law. There is no authority for such a pre-tenco, pre-tenco, except tlie ipst dixit ' of a third-rate third-rate judge working in the interests of tho Methodists. Under our free system, a Territory or State may pass or omit to pass what constitutional laws it pleases on I he subject of mnrriagc, and the plea that tho peoplo of Utah must be bound by the common law of Kngland, or of Massachusetts, or of any other outside State, in respect to marriage, U utterly unwarrantable and untrue, because we cannot point to any authority for it, except the usage of certain States and the assumptions of certain lawyers. Where is the warrant for any such pretoncer it is not in the constitution constitu-tion of tho United States, nor in the laws of Congress, uor in the laws of Utah. Where then, except in a lawyer's law-yer's brain? The practice and the will of the people of an American State or Territory are in the absence of any atatute law against polygamy, a higher authority on the subject, so far as that people are concerned, than the common law of Kogland or of New Kngland, or even the rules of the Methodist church. So long as a republican form of government is pre- 1 served in Utah, ana life and property arc protected, no United States judge has the right to say that tho common law of Kngland shall supercede the marriage customs of the people, or to stigmatize open polygamy as adultery. We recur to this subject because there are few other presses to raise a voice against the gross violations of law that are going on iu Utah. Cry out that one word "polygamy! " and everybody seema ready to join in the hunt against the Mormons. The very men who want to license brothels, and to make sexual impurity easy and safe to the many, hold up their hands in holy horror at the idea of supposing that polygamists can have any rights which a white man is bound to respect. To judge from the way things are going on under Methodist rule, there is but ono crime of any account, and that is polygamy. There is nothing in the slate of morals among the Mormons to justify this sudden persecution on the part of the Methodists and our Methodist President. lYom all the testimony we can get, the evils of intcmporanoc and licentiousness are almost unknown in Salt Lake ciiy wherever the Mormons have control. The Mormon children arc as healthy, as brightand intelligent as those of any other people; and the women, if unhappy, have a wonderful faculty of concealing their wrciched-ness. wrciched-ness. Indeed, they petition for its continuance. Houses of prostitution have been wholly unknown in Utah except so far as they have been recently recent-ly introduced by the anti-Mormon "carpet-baggers." Iu spite of all reports to the contrary, time has confirmed con-firmed tho extraordinary fact that a more moral and blameless community , than the Mormons of Salt Lake city i does not exist ! We do not accept this fact as a proof that polygamy is a good thing. We ' do not believe in it. The influence and example, and the theocratic authority ' of Brigham Young have undoubtedly done much to keep his people in order. But we would say to government, tahr no illegal sUp to arret ttc. great e .prri- , mrnt now govig on in Utah. The experiment ex-periment may not be new, but the conditions are new, and let it be tried , accordingly. If it is, in ihe nature of things, f alse to morality, to physiology, to spiritual progress, and to divine truth, let us have no fear but it will ' fall of its own weight and rottenness. 1 God Almighty does not need the Vlp of the Methodists to brtnp about the consequences which man attach to a violationof natural and divine liws. Hut if the experiment can throw n'y light upon tho great social filiations now beginning to be aniiatcJ ti.e questions of female suffrage, of marriage, mar-riage, the laws of generation, th.1 u;oi:il and physical improvement nf the r.i.'.'' it may he wnrih utir whiic u m'o it fairly tried. Tlie-c great fjue.-lions ruuit occupy a laree part of tho public attention for Iherc.-t of this century; and let in got ali tlie help wo can from facts. Nothing can be inure unjust lh;m the attempt of Ilorprrt. W,,L and other journals lo confound Mormon polygamy po-lygamy with stiL-h criminal ofie'xvs a-theft a-theft and murder. "A iarv. ' mv IlariWs HWk',, "vv.,uld hardly rofu-e lo convict a m:in who piekf d a p.vkel, upon his plea that his relium-- f-i.it ti enjoined a community of goods " A moment's reflection won! 1 h.ivo shown the writer tl-.:it his parallel d.n; not hold good. Polygamy is not defended de-fended on I lie ground. that the M.nmoti religion improves if, but on ihcsiinplu ground ihtt a turitornit community who chiUfse fo jiraclicf it, jvh.!ur or religious. r physiolngiml i,- ani off" r reasons, letrr i '-c! rirht to . . '1 h.' 1 attempt to maku k a criun-, like ;!.::'., . is fatae both to th'j Jcwir-h und . Clnisiiun Scrip: urer; ti!.-c lo hi.-lory, to physiology, lo s icn.re and lo i-om- ! mon sense. Bigamy, under our Slate laws, h:i- ' the essence ol'a crime solely beum-ic it. j Li supposed lo involve criminal deception. decep-tion. A man obtains a wile, under a j fulso pretence; under tho pretence, namely, that he is not already married, i Lei two women voluntarily accept him j as their husband, and the offence wouM be morally, if not technically, changed. The Mormons have just as much of I a prejudice against the brothel systcoi, 1 supported chiefly by married men, . which prevails in the comuiuniiics where Harper's IVVc. 'y circulates, as the latter lias against, polygamy. Kach party has a right to his peculiar prefer- enccs; and it is only through great . social trials and experiments that the i absolute truth which we all desire cnu ' be obtained. lint this attempt tostig- matize polygamy as a crime iiko theft, j or burglary, or thu obtaining a wife j under false pretences, is wholly un- , worthy the intelligence and fairness of a liberal scholar and thinker like Mr, Curtis. It looks too much like truek-I liug to the popular fury of the hour at the expense oi'justicc, at the expense of truth. Banner of Light. |