| Show A SINGULAR DECISION duade by anderson in a case of naturalization mr W C dunbar applied to judge anderson wednesday for a of hiis naturalization papers to the court in answer to the question propounded lie said ho was naturalized sixteen years anpo that he biad lost his papers been a polygamist at one time lut was not now he however believed the doctrine the judge remarked that this waa a new experience for him and took tho matter under advisement the questions put were these court do you believe in polygamy mr dunbar yes sir court did you ever live in polygamy mr D yes sir court when mr D up till about aix years ago court why did you cease six years ago mr D because my plural wife died court re you willing to obey the law in the future mr D yes the court sotto voce belief belief huelit not to be an objection at aliis point a youna attorney named ikird came forward a law book and made objection to the request of mr dunbar being granted this objection was on the ground that the applicant had at one time practiced polygamy and was therefore not a man of good moral character as required by statute court to mr hurd were you present sir when mr dunbar answered the questions I 1 put to him mr no court then mr dunbar lias stated that his plural wife died six years ago and lie promised to obey the law of the united states in regard to polygamy in tha future mr to mr dunbar have you not taken a wife since sir mr danbar no sir court this case involves a question with which I 1 am not familiar and will take time to confide it my feeling are mr dunbar that you are entitled to your pacers buta will take till tomor to mor row to decide yesterday Yeste iday morning judge anderson sailed mr dunbar aad further examined him eliciting the following information I 1 was married to my pluvial wife in 1858 out my first papers three years laier tool hayo had but one plural wife attorney joseph hurd said he objected to the reissue of papers to the applicant first because it was not showed that hs was of good moral character and second eliat le was not attached to the principles of hie constitution mr hurd also said that judge powers wanted to say something on ohp subject and II 11 S lancy wag dispatched to bring in the judge mr said that because ir dunbar believed in polygamy he should not be admitted if such a thing should be allowed it would not be long before there was a change in public opinion I 1 and what was now a crime would be made a virtue judge anderson tiie applicant states that he lias lost his papers he has not been able to establish the former iesue of the paper so this will be considered as a now application the wit to his good moral character he states that he went into polygamy in 1858 and lived in it till six years ago he further states that he believes polygamy right the question is can a man who has lived in polygamy be considered a man of good moral character and attached to the constitution I 1 think congress considered polygamy to bo immoral and that was why laws were passed against it before the law passed he married a plural wife and notwithstanding the provisions of the poland act hia honor evidently meant the edmunds act lie still lived with her he did not separate prior to her death can it be said that one who has been guilty of forgery or counterfeiting would be a man of good moral character I 1 think not it is true aliis applicant believes ho was not doing a moral wrong but a man who violates the law is not a man of good moral character it is true eliat within the past five years owing to his cifes death lie has not broken the laws mr hurd has cited an authority to the effect that good moral character must be I 1 shown during his whole residence in the territory and not only for five years prior to the application for naturalize t anthe applicant has not been convicted of polygamy but he bays he has been guilty I 1 think it cannot be said he has behaved as a man of good moral character or attached to the constitution ution of the united states because he lived in violation of the law for twenty fire years polygamy is considered a crime in every state in the union the congressional laws have been passed became of the very immoral conduct of the people of utah of course they dont think it immoral but the government docs I 1 think that aside from a polygamist foro his conduct has been irreproachable it has been that of a good citizen but that makes no difference the application will be denied |
