| OCR Text |
Show TRESEUVE RELUaoL'S FltEEIKUI. Tin: following excellent article Is taken from tho Chicago Time: We commend It to the attention of our Hebrew citizens w ho join iu the "Litieral" attempt to steal the pro-crty pro-crty of tho "Mormon" Church, and the "Liberal'' scheme to rob the law-abidiug "Mormons" of the elective elec-tive franchise. One error occurs In tlie Timet article w lilclj calls for correction. cor-rection. That is the statement that the "Morniou" religion "for a purely pure-ly secular purpose taught poljg-amy." poljg-amy." When tho dwtrinu of plural marriage was taught and advocated ad-vocated by the L'Idersof the Church it was from a religious, not a secular standpoint, and the ceremony was shoun to be purely ecclesiastical, seeking no recognition or sanction from ths secular law. In other rc-si'ccls rc-si'ccls the article is worthy of strung commendation. The Timet says: "The second expedition of Columbus Colum-bus to the now world was furnished forth in part w ith funds gained by tho wholesale confiscation of property belonging be-longing to Jews who were banished from Castile by Leon. Maukind's senso of justice condemns justly this robbery of a race whoso only offense was a rigid adherence to tne religious belief and practice prac-tice of the fathers. Yet at the clone of tho fifteenth century it was thought no great crime to desjioil men who denied the divinity of Christ and held tenaciously to that ancient faith w Iiich is the foundation of Christianity. Chris-tianity. Thus to havo robbed and expatriated ex-patriated Ihn Jw U now regarded n.th abhorrence as both im4.j!.tlc and unjust. i-palQTvas taon not constitutional consti-tutional but an absolute monarchy. All Christendom was Uirbarouslv set a;raiiiz the descendants of the chosen people, who persisted In denying the divinity of Christ, ami it was then thought no crime to deprive them of their worldly possessions. We know now that this, as all anti-Semitic legislation and despoliation, whether practiced In England or on the continent; conti-nent; whether drastic or merclj pro-hib.try pro-hib.try of those civil rights which Jews hold in common w ith all reputable reput-able mankind, was a horrible invasion of personal right. The civilization of our own time reprobates It as cruel, srcindalous. rapacious, unjustifiable, atrocious. And so it was. Rat letns seo how genuine Is our prepress in religious re-ligious liberty. "Despite the g'orious declaration of relljions freedom conveyed In our fundamental law, a declaration which has been of Incalculable benefit not only in building up tho republic but also in assuring peace and order Trunin Trun-in its augmenting territory, wo have solemnly decreed the spoliation of a rollgiotts sect. Their property is escheated es-cheated to tlus atate, and in certain tcrriloncs they themselves, it Is pro-pssod, pro-pssod, with the assent of the Republican Republi-can majority in Congreas, shall not possess tho franchise common to all male mankind who, not felons or Idiots, Idi-ots, havo reached 21 years of age. The Mormon in the United -States a under the harrow as was the Jew m ipaln. lOOyears ago. Oar boasted progress does not save him against the horrible intolerance of a party professing to serve God and morality. True, hla individual property is not confiscated, but be has been denied the franchise In Idaho merely because he is a Mormon, Mor-mon, a proposition to which the Republican Re-publican House, assents, and with the t fall approval of the Republican majority ma-jority of the Supreme Court, the Democratic minority vigorously vigor-ously dissenting, tho cruel, the unusoal, the unjust, the damnable plan of confiscating church property of Mormons In Utah Is approved. Never before In the history of the United States has a project for the confiscation of church property received re-ceived authoritative approval. With reference to the Mormon tho safeguard of he Federal Constitution, re-enacted in the constitution of more than thirty States, is broken down, and all upon the shabby pretense that the moral senso of the age condemns polygamy. So indeed it does. Hut the laws against polygamy were sufficient to punish those Mormons, not ten per cent of thsenUro Bomber, frailly, of tho offense. of-fense. This ample provision docs not content us. Animated by tho same craft, the aame iniquitous intolerance which in the fifteenth century banished ban-ished the Jew from Spain and cornis-cattd cornis-cattd his goods to the State,wo pursue the Mormon merely as a Mormon and regardless of his practice or non-orac-tieeof polygamy. The Constitution declare that Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting tho free exercise thereof. Truo or false the Mormon religion has flourished for forty years. It claims authority from ou high, the original of all religions. re-ligions. For a pnrely secular purpose ithas taught polygamy, aprarbcoof David and Solomon, bnt polygamy has been followed by only a small percentage of its professors. Yet Congreas approves of their wholesale disfranchisement in Idaho, and the Supreme Court, with the constitutional provision before that tribunal that the free exercise of religion shall not bo prohibited, declares as constitutional and valid a law of Congress dissolving dissolv-ing tho charter of the Mormon Church and confiscating all its property In Utih save only such as may be used Immediately and to a limited value for religious purposes. That Is, in the nineteenth century nnderan enlightened enlight-ened Constitution guaranteeing religious re-ligious freedom we do as to Mormons what we condemn Ferdinand, as absolute ab-solute monarch, for having dono in tho fifteenth century regarding Jens." |
