OCR Text |
Show 9 'A "THE ?J0I!B0S WILL MJT H frlf promise." B i .' : ' A co3D msny )arra arc echoing 1 ' I the statement, ma Je over the w ires, B 21 ' that Judge Anderson has been de- Hj j lf llvering wme strong opinions as to H I ! V the sincerity of "Mormon" utttr- H ! ' J ances about the discontinuance of H .'I ; floral marriages in Utah. The chie H I point iu it Is "the refusal of Ht ' Mormons wbo come befuruacourtlo B j even Kombe Uut they will obey the H j 'sj I laws, and thus proclaim to the H ,4 : world that tlicir pretensions are in V i i I J lad faith." iH ' ift- It is very difficult to make the !p?j "press writers of the country under- - rtaud the facts in this case. But we J -will explain them once more, even R I j though our eflert may have but little B Y t ''. J, tCect j J The convIctioHs obtained in the B . I f I courts are not for polygamy, as sup- B ; U posed, and us persons hero ho want H : j U to deceive the public, artfully make j f jtappsar. They are for "unlawful I . f. il cohabitation." as that offense is con- I A I "S ftrucd by the courts. And that con- IBB V i Btru Hon is different from auy Intcr- B I J preiation of tlie term that was ever BBBV I ' i uel1 ln criminal jurisdiction before Hflflflj it was applied to the "Mormons." Bflflflj The msn who are brought before BflBVj the courts are principally those who Bflflflj many years ao contracted plural BjflaflJ marriages, and find themselves now Bjflaflt with wives and families dependent Bflflflt uponthim and whom they will not Bjflaflf cast off. The riightrtt association, BflgHj however Innocent, with their plural BjfljfeS wives is judicially construed to con- BjflBH ' stitute Uie olTeae named. The Bjflaflf ordinary interpretation is entirely J discarded. "Idviug together" Is not proven except iu ery rare in- stances. Bflflflj ' "Mormons" arc convicted on BflfljV evidence that woull be considered Bflflfl proof In the defen danb' favor in Bflflfll any other case. Men who have not Bflflfl) lived with their plural wives for Bflflflt years, who have not maintained Bjflflfl wlUl them tiiose intlmite relations Bflflfl), tint belong to the matrimonial Bflflfll rtatc, butwbo have been teen in Bflflflf theirconipany, or In some cases are Bflflflf supected through circumstantial Bflfljflj evidence, but with no positive proof Bflflflf of having been in their compauy, Bflflflt are convicted and then asked if BjVjflfl J they will obey the law in the fljfljflV Conscious of not actually vlolat- Bflflflt iug aD5" 'aw knouing they have flflflflff been convicted on actions entirely BBBBw innocent, morally and legally, liow BBflBfl can they proailie to do more iu-the BBflBJj .t future than Uiay have been doing in H I the Immediate last? H t The trap set for them is cowardly, flBBflfl f, untemptiblu and designed to fret BBflBJj the whole "Mormon" people In a BJBJBa fake light before the public Any BJBBB one who will read with unbiated BJBJfl mind the particular!) of trials of BBBBC "Morniins" for unlawful cohabit- BJBBflj ntion, and scthe utter lack of evi- BJBBflj dene;, will be amiiei at the vcr BJBBflj diets ol gjdty, until they under- BflfljSj ttandlhv juriei arc selected from BJBBflj ',. the political enemies of the "Mur- H inonV and are expected to convict. BBflB J Ak a man who has kept the law B 1 K rtrictly, and who has paid his p'u- B i- m ral vifelosatttntlouthau he would R 1 Rive to any Iidy whom he might B J chaneu to meet, whether he will H j ! obey the law in future, au S what BJBJBJj i V' can he answer? II? caa not be mure BJBJBJj I obedient to the law than lie hak Slrtta, norml eapromise which implies im-plies he will do diflerently, and Pjjjjjjjjjjjjji v which would amount to a cnnfU- BJBBflt j sicn that he has broken the law and H Z that his conviction isjuiL IB Such refusals arc proofs of candor fK I I and siucerity Instead of evidence H I. thai "Mormon pretences are in bail H I f faith." They arc the strongest iu- H ' ' dicationsof good filth and houor Bflflflfl tliat cojIu b: given. Xj A nd i apcri that comment on Uik O thould remimber, that every "Mor-jj "Mor-jj I' mon" who votes has taken an oath , that he will not violate the land of J ' the United States and particularly 3 thofc that relate to iwlygamy and jVBHBa. j lexuil offentes. So that it is uot IB I S ihs "Mir.noa" people, as represent. BJJBJBJB , : ed, who refuse to promise to obe H - the law. Butitliafewlndividu- B 1 1 i i als n ho are in the sitIon we have B - described, and whi are cronde-i BJBJBB Into a corns', ail with a prison m l taring them in ihe free, decline, BJBJBB ecn to iro.crve their liberty, to BBBBB m;ke promios vhich imply guilt H and appear o bi deniauded for BBBBB reasons tbat should b J reprobated by B all just and cindld mind;. DJI It may b: said that some of thtfe BBBBB men who decline to promise have BflflflB pleaded guilty to the charge. True. BR And wh? Simply to save their HH j wive and children the mortification Bflflflfl and terror of being forced iLto a Bflflflfl) court room, before a gaping crowd, flBBBBj anxious to licar something "racy," BBBBBj and ansnerijuesUons that sensitive BBBJ and timid women cannot hear with- B out a H The manufacturers of these n BBBBBj ports understand all Ihis. But they BBBBB( know the Ignorance and prejudice B that prevail in relation to the "Mor- BBJ mons," anJ, taking advantage of BBBBJB thesu contradictions, Ihry circulate BJflBBB their untruths witli demoniacal de- B light Is it not time that the Amer- BBBBBJ r lean press should deal out facts In- BBBBBj ' I ttead of thtfe perennial fictions B 1 about the people who have made the BCjBBJj ' 1 fl.urishing Territory of Utah? |