| OCR Text |
Show KM Str1 THE-CHURCH CAE ECiSI. aHli wS.- Today we ate enabled lojmwut & fir. lairs to our ftsitan further Information S SbF! regarding lac dex:Wonif tlie Cidlcd Li fat fH BtatSiifi-meCourt,intheChurcli raw1' Hfc-J H, rcntlered jete-rd:iy. There i KK ifp2 atfflUng peculiarity iu nearly all JmB HtM tbe !cCTt affecting the rights of I Eft ' fir "" Ijltter-1"y Saints they are nl 1 jS IS"-. UKt ,nvrbly tubvcniivc of eie- r 39? IllP'-f roentarj or fundauic-utal jwintitilce. cW fl They are, as a rule, so glaringly ud- jf Mf ' fe-J constitutional that Uicer true cbarac- VM Hk- terfejJaJniyjjahinlhecomprt.hi.a- e i IPtl atoa of the rasa of t' e x-ujle. It I me ?sl reqaJwa no legal training to jwr- I ftS 'matt re the situation. A wayfaring I wan nUU1 Wa IUB,n'' re'J wo v' 1 iSsn to beable. In a brief vjace, to ahoir, I Mj .aBH '. faHoii to the cae umler con- iHaSaTo' aderattoti. lyt The argument uiaJobyAni erica's I W' ' fowl ere4ooustituUonal lawyer, Dan- I jp Be " Vretater, la the famous Iaut- " S' (Si-! aouth Colleje case, was followui 1 W- WMiti bya tiecifrkra whnJi lias hitherto j. Sfc M " beea rcganiej an forever establish. il In the Bropositteu that a charter, iP p - granted and accepted, becomes a flt Sfl-. contract, and pasties undtr the jfe -i ahelbar of that bulwark of pronerty fe 5 lights UiecUuse of the Cu.lsUtJ- ' it"- ' tion wa,dl Jre that the obliga- " ' ""n of coutraita shall Dot be Jl J". impaired. To hold that the Wff" fe i grauUng power, whidi is usually I g? JB't . the leirislaUve departruent f the 1 & ''S " government in tlds couDtry, may Sv ft gie a charter and then revoke it i,S a rJeatnre, after the grantees f. & If hv conformed to its teroH, if-' JiT, aDl luddci ujin it, Is S t " " un,lio all corporations, fe Ls prlTate and jasoicipal, and subject ! W X- th" too"l ioelr exfctence to the I&-!, caprice of the legislative wliL Ik l"fe 4,V auchadtctrine be etaMished and & Kfc to! to hanks, railroads ai.d all K ' kinli of cnterprlsta bued ujn a r' s charter, would quuMy sink in f &2 "' ' ahie. and perhais' become worth- i" ltS" lt "' UMavf,i a necessity of I jp5 c uriesett cSrihzjticn, that eiur-l&l eiur-l&l 1 haagraalcd and acted upon shall be I S ' li deetnoJtacrcd contracU. Thus in 1 5p " CMe "f ,ne "Mormon- Cbarth, I f?3 "i nioderu civilization has received a PS.: ". a thro In a vital lart. i JL ik ' Taking the telegraphic eynurtis Im ic'.' -O r the oarjfcrmuiated by the court S'ji- a justification for its cxtraordl- M I oaiy decree as fairly correct, it is it Si HI ' presumed that one of lis elements I S 3p was too that Congress has a fl isht to "annul any law of theTer- Kt' fo Thta IwP,ti ias nothing Wil. te -RWJ U,"B A 1"PMo llW 'ilr faB1 of BraMit h guar- I-Wf' $& anteed to the people, whether S Jp theynsidein a State or Territory. a! vs. ' AB"otborify of the kind claimed I l- pags- far Oonsress would constitute that Itf JS8' - 'X an auUxT-y, guveming tte J ?'-S p poopfe of the Territories as an i $$ S enipewr roles his 1jcbl Sad,, I , 'i onn " Svtwut. is anti republl- j VI '"S i Th" IBle b for Cougre to S . ' cxerehajaeuperrlsory and anoun- " ij fa5 power rver O.e msclnHiits 1 P c tocal legislature, i f ST invariably been J "3 auhmlttul for its approval. ' If Those statutes which tre not I ' dfaspproved ly Congee,, be , Xt Cma the 'a of the Territory 'i'M? m principle that a nalion- . ft'T toW SOeS fcto fl"crt' hen the ' ',l 1 rsdent e the United SLites Tails ' ;f ' - to act upon it. To claim that Con- f- Km hiatal ex pott ae dAhl to - 'ti annul the laws of the Territory that I l " " in operation for nearly I' . a generation is almort as ahrard as I , - ? claim that the Chief Executive ' oftnRspnblieaasaretruacaveveto power-Such power-Such a doctrine as that eimnci-ated eimnci-ated as one of tl e ajolugits ujn ' J. vrbieh tliis onj.nt decision reels t 2 "noaotslorendennglhenghtofthe '' " Wt P"0! of the Territory to local aelf. Rrarnmentadelaonauda snare, f W ?' takesatrayevary vesti je of ropu- j Sl larsovKrefenty and constitutes Con- $? S king. -T Trasaoningofthccoutttfhere- s in it claims that tlio statute which 4, ; - . incorporated the Church wjs in , - ,ikT contravenUoa of the constitutional ZX inhibition agaioM enactments re- ' ,i" 8Mi,nan!sUblihmeutofrehgloii -,,; fallacious on its fcce. At the time ' t the u:ute P1 Hiere as no . JgH Sa incorporation act Thebjdv i!? f saHis worshippers whlh wa t I ". affected by It became a body corpo "3fe rafcthat.t might boh! tie legal Utle j-'f to property. All otber churches are Sfeir cornorate bodies Ifot the same rea- rf w "l to the contrary of "f J v - Ule posiHon assumed by the court i- L. and that Coagre and the aupirf fc rf- S 1'ec "ct,on s Mv U1dr jtlJ, review have done Hut which the J H? . ir has charged against tbe loral & legislature, which wc will now pn- w. ceedtosbow. 4- AX act that Btvorsone religion -1 ?.. owt othcr is a 10laiiou of tbe it'-J genius and even the kUtr of tae ttonsuuHioust inhlbiliou in relation to an cetaWUIinwut of religion. Con-t Con-t grteshae loesed au act disiueofpor- j aKnj: one reltcicus lod am! csciKaamr iU property to the gov-orauieiit; gov-orauieiit; cowequenlly, to the ei-i ei-i tent that it has iliscriminaled i against one church it has favored ' the others by exeniptiou from the process. It ins constituted the other churches, left legally intact i and in pocoafston of their property, 1 - the established State religions. In ' Euttainlug this leal wrong, the couit has placed (b teal upun an un-couetitutloaal un-couetitutloaal procc s of unjust dls-crltiiinat.ou, dls-crltiiinat.ou, which cu a uon u the I equality of rtligion. and iujlvi iurJ 1 citizens bt f re tlic t. w and before I i(n'iaiiiittra(i n. I I T--n lie t! I-j-1 i u re t lea if I the proccts of dlsinronratlan and robbery applied to tlio Church of Jtsus Christ of latter-day Salnls were extended to all churches except ex-cept one, that which was exempt would, by this favorable treatment, be, to all intent.", tbe established church of the State, being favored and fostered by law whilo the others were legally demolished. It will be obser ed that if the disincorporating and cscheatiag clauses of the 1M-mund-Tuckeractarenot in violation viola-tion of the comtitutional Inhibition 'against legal enactments relating to an tstabll'hment cf religion it is difficult to underrtand what would be. Tiie (Utute and decision are la violation of the theory of American Inftitutions that "all men are equal before the law." If one clats can be deprived of property by a process pro-cess that does not apply to all citizens citi-zens alike, the theoretic enunciation enuncia-tion i a hollow mockery. The peaceable posK&slon of prorirty It-a It-a natural and inherent right; equality equal-ity demands that sptxial methods of deprivation of it thall not cxUL Xo one will claim that tlure Is mi preltnieof sj plying theramc opera lion that rot the Saints of thur prowrty to any other claks of people nltbiu tlic Re4iblic; consiuenlly our point Is made. One of thenorst features of tlie rtasoulng of the decision Is that tart which indicates the iieccselty fur eacheatment as Inevitably following lliedbIucoqnrationof the Church. It is held that, the 1-orj oration belug ditibolvcd, there were no parties to whom tl property could be awarded, consequent it must c-cheat to the government. This Is one of th? ino-t inexiusablo violations of equltyeerxprtseil. ltsba-lslias not the merit of truthfulm-". The agencies appuinted by the donors of the proirty aro still in cxi'tence, and it cuiiIJ hare been confidfd to them, if not fr u-, at Icai-t for distribution. It ifuot-i4ibluof proof tint it was cu-tomary to use much of tlie property proper-ty of tlie Cbun.h to feed the hungry and clothe the naked, and for other beneflceiit jiurpo-es. Whtnagov-.rumeut Whtnagov-.rumeut descends, on a fal-o hy-othttis, hy-othttis, to rob the joorand Indigent Indig-ent it goes down Into the miiilttt psafrible bu-iness in which it can engage. It is claimed by the court that the Church has been guilty of au abucu ofchtrtered rights. It is prvsuin-Sbie prvsuin-Sbie that this is Intended as an excuse ex-cuse for escheating the Church property to the government. We den j that any hilIi abuse has ex-Wed, ex-Wed, and fuithtr coutinj that, ah!o from that propoiition, the court was cot called upon to 1M uin mstters cf fact. The controcrfy was purely a question of law, that Uing, as wc understand It, tbe basis of the a-peal. a-peal. Thb dragging In of irrtlev. ant assertions is neither Jut nor dignified, and conMitutts cbijL-ttr contesting of apillon slip tilth 110 feathers. The Court declares that the db-tingulsLIug db-tingulsLIug features of "Mormon-im' "Mormon-im' are polygamy aud aUoIutc eatleslartfcal control our its cliurch memiers. Of the first it is fcuilicitut here to observe that the quest 1011 before be-fore the Court was onetf proierty righus not of criminal practice; of hi, not of facts. Tlie guilt or Inno-c-euceof a defendant clitrged with enmc, was not proerly an Usuo before tbe C'-urt; tbuqucstiou to Iv determined was the riht to own, possess ami control iirorty. To say that the Court ha I a right to take judicial notice of the fact that lolygam uas a doctrine and criminal practice of the '-Mormon-," and that their Church property might, therefore, be confiscated, is to-sj that the court might al-o Ule Judicial uotlce of the fact that not more than two per cent of the membership of that body ever engaged in that practice, anu that for the tCcnsc. of to, a .'inuJrwl may bo punbhe.1. Hut the proposition that the property of law-breakers msj be coufl-cated wiiiiout tlie trial and coin it tion, upon a criminal iliarge, of it, owners, own-ers, is to jy thit counVsitioii may follow suspicion or accusation. The practice of this doctrine by the monarch of Franco was one of tlie chief causes that led to tlic storming of the Ihtstila and the reign cf terror htch oW a million lives. I is anarchy in one of the worst forms it could assume. Of tlie alMOlute control under which tbe members of the "Mormon'' "Mor-mon'' Church are alleged to be held, it can be said anl supported bj their unanimous voice, tliat ihey hold themselves to be the freest and m t independent community on earth The rule of common consent prevails In all their affairs. They are oontroled by their com-refioTi; not by their officers, but by tlieircox-oemcet. tlieircox-oemcet. The voluntary union of tbe mass is ml-taken for depotic sway cxercb-ed by its leading men. To show the absurdity of this error made by the Court would not 1 difficult. ltfeamiterofcurrenthisU)ry,and of statistics of which, did tho" connection con-nection warrant, a court might tako Juliclal not ire, that ninety-eight per cent of the ' Mormon" people aro law-abiding, anl haio never violated vio-lated any statute of tlie laud, llivo they not a riirht, then, to act n itli unity? Is harmony of belief and conduct among Church mem-bert mem-bert an offense? Can it be urged as a reason why their property should be taken from them? Grant, for argument's sake, that tlie leaders of a cliurch exercise 'absolute controP' overifct members if the litter live witliiu the law, and choose to submit sub-mit to and sustain the former, lias tlie civil power the right to interfere? inter-fere? When thegovernment begins to regulate tlie internal ecanoaiyof a chuich,-where will the cud be? Tlie Court says that the government govern-ment hs been patient in its dealings deal-ings with tlie "Mormon". Tlie fact m that foryears the government has Impatiently surged against tbe restraints of the Constitution, until si lengui it lias ciursltliea asunder, Inan eager desire to abolish au unpopular un-popular church. Tlie Court also says that the history of the "Mor-mous" "Mor-mous" is one of resistance to law and the commission of pitiless atrocities atroc-ities on their jure. Such language, from such a source, upon such an oocaslou, is an outrage, not upon truth alone, but upon the dignity of the Court itself, aud the dbpaulon- 1 ate and Impartial method which I should have prevailed in the final decision of one of the moot important 1 Ian suits known to hbtory. Xcthing In the record before the court called ' t"t su"h expressions. They were I extraneous to lis occasion, not ger- 1 mane to the issue, aud show that I th memV-r of ll.j C urt hail al I 1 I (Kruiir clamrr, oud mitltr" cutslda of Iho record and argu. ments, to Influence their decision. Tlie comparison drawn by the Court between plurtl marriage and assassination, as religious customs, is odious, not alone to the people at whose expense. It was intended to be made, but to sers-, reason and Justice. The absence of common elements in the two practices is so conspicuous as to need nocmnieuV It is gratifying to observe that tbe Court was not a unit in approving approv-ing this robbery of a church, as the Chief Justice and associate justice I'ielJ and Lamar dissented. We have no doubt tii.it there are many right thinking anl intelligent intelli-gent cilUens in the JU-publlc who will be glad to be found in such noble company. As usual, the Latter-day Saints have received the ncus of this decision de-cision a fresh evidence of tho unjust un-just discrimination to which the are tuljected with calmness. To as.-ert that they are not inwardly exercised In regard to it woull be Incorrect. It l an important event of their hl-tory, and It stands In the same relation in regard to Hie country at large. It is projier In this connection to direct attention to the fact that the powers that be are determined to einphaiizc'tbo declaration made by every faithful member of the Church that Joseph Smith was a Prophet. ThcfouuJcr, iu the hands of Cod, of the Church, declared, without qualification, that the lime would come when the heais of the nation would, in their cilbrts to destroy what the Inrd haJ cstablLshud, override every 1 ri 111.1 pie cf the Con stitutiou, and that from that initial oiratlon, the same process would extend throughout the country, until un-til scarcely a shred of the basic law would remain intact. Tlie precedents as applied to this community are Increaisljg and mulllplilug. Gradually they are Itrmeatiiig tho entire body-politic, and the result prediced by the Prophet mutt follow- their legitimate caase. These results are di-integra-tiouandauarchy. The very iiI-tion iiI-tion in which the first victims of this destructive policy are placed Is necessarily educational, and will prepare them for the exnltcd labor when the hour of imminent peril shall arise, of reorg-inlnng the nation na-tion upon tho basic principles embraced em-braced In the Constitution, as pro-die pro-die ted by the Prophet. Nottt ithstan JIng that the prophecies prophe-cies must l fulfilled, as etlcct mu't unerringly follow cause, according to the Ian sau J spirit of truth, it is the duty of the people unjustly discriminated dis-criminated agalnt to lawfully contend con-tend against tho deprivation of their rights and demand redress of wrongs from the-e who have the Iwcr to a Jjut thcra, that the Tord may be justified whe.i Ho shall take pait iu the controversy on the side of the opprc-cd. |
