OCR Text |
Show THE LAW AND THE ETHICS. Through one of The Tribune's correspondents corre-spondents an anxious Inquirer sought to know something concerning the violation vio-lation of law or lolation of covenant Involved In plural marriage ceremonies, performed beyond the jurisdiction of the 1'nlted States, but under the countenance coun-tenance of the churcb leaden In Utah. Answers have been made by prominent promi-nent attorneys through the columns of this paper These answers are sulll-Clently sulll-Clently clear and arc good law and ethics; eth-ics; but they do not expose some of the circumstances which make such pluiul marriage solemnization particularly an atrocious offense against this Government Govern-ment To the legal phases of the question these further remarks may be deemed applicable. The United States has been especiaii jealous and sensitive concerning concern-ing the use of that liberty which Is accorded ac-corded to citlzeK and communities under un-der our institutions It has determined that it Will not harbor within Its Jurisdiction Juris-diction organizations of men who plan, and who, through themselves or agents commit Infractions of the law In other countries. On repeated 01 caslons it ha9 exercised the sovereignty of Its power to pursue and to break up such organizations organ-izations If any new ones shall appear, and the present laws and sstem of administration ad-ministration are Insufficient, It will find a way, by arbitrary and Justified extension exten-sion of executive power or by law, to reach the cases as they may arise. The I'nlttd States will not sanction the existence ex-istence within Its borders of a chun h r any other organization which directs its adherents to go to Mexico or to Canada and there violate, under the sanction of the church, the laws of our sister Republic Re-public or the laws of the neighboring Dominion Of the ethical aspect something more may be said The pledge of abstention from plural marriage and plural marriage mar-riage relations, made by the revelation and the authoritative interpretation thereof, was deemed to be binding upon the church leaders and members everywhere every-where by the Government of the United States The t ;,, eminent c ould not conceive con-ceive that the Leaders would assume that a practice which was morally wrong for certain people here was light for the same people In Mexico or Canada. Can-ada. It Is true that the hierarchy kept the revelation from extended Official tocoKiilliori by the church in general, hy withholding It from the Book of Doctrine Doc-trine and Covenants, which is assumed to contain the law of God to the body throughout the world; and while It was thus withheld some of them boasted that their promise had been given only to the Government of the United States and that the revelation only applied to this country. But when President Joseph F. Smith testified at Washington Washing-ton that the omission of this Important law of God had been unintentional and 1 that he would Immediately direct that the revelation be printed as such In the next edition of the Doctrine and I ove-nants. ove-nants. he destroyed the flimsy fabric of that particular evasion by Which polygamous marriages were solemnized In Canada or Mexico for citizens of Utah without a violation of the pledge t' the country. Of course, as Surmised by ninny of trie faithful, the president of the church may now order that no new edition of the hook be printed. And in this way he' win av what, under the circumstances. Is scarcely worth saving his promise. But broadly speaking speak-ing the sworn recognition of this as a revelation fnm God. Is ample authentication authenti-cation and It Is binding on all members of the church everywhere If it is binding bind-ing upon any one anywhere. Hence It Is apparent that neither In law nor In ethics has the church or any member nny excuse whatever for tho perpetration of plural marriage any-1 where on the face of the earth or on the face of the waters. The questions could only have originated origi-nated In a 1 omnuiiin w her. c-asion and equivocation have gained such general gen-eral sway as that people are losing their landmar-kS, It IS the most uncomplimentary uncom-plimentary thing Which has been said of Utah; it originates with the investigation investi-gation it Washington It is repeated In essence by hundreds of newspapers: ' that the word of many of Utah's eminent emi-nent men Is no longer to be trusted and that community falsehood is becoming communil y rule " |