Show DEFENSE II ii r I 1 b I tl 55 wre tC ni nil not this hiding time their the tho thor I to this t h II t II I hushel b by ny a r 0 In III J SY Iy t 1 i 1 that n upon nl r In the and it t th n I 1 tile the tileS thet S of their belief In t J belet I L J I I ot of that doctrine I IrIS rIS b Taylor John rg rI on onA nB II A foron f ih York to tI sh 1 a paper q nd that doc h 1 J I it under the tte title n I lie his of off n fl I II f ot of two of the lie tl York ork City and j 5 ot ant r dO j n b 4 h h nn nfl 1 j I In plural M ill II I his to meet al all aT that ti tIl remember tb so tUI the then chap ii States Pr r rI f 1111 II 11 I for the I 4 tah Ing Into n a ills I r i I Is fl id was met 1 They argued the ther f I Ill fl ged 11 r days day In the Mor II man Through ni these 1 1 n 1 Il Ire re being forme formed wih e fl to ther theIr conceal j d In of the lie it hii itc were celebrated n II le 1 r 11 ns II Its marriages T i ar t anniversaries or of the oc I v IH and I it 1 ad I 1 I fi er lano lanoi sane i sanctioned by first firsta I t I b by women who a ii lS i 1 I Ill relatiOns k thin things to show you t I I jt h P hl lau ben been a I r I F 1 Ion icing 1 si time In the t I J I Mormon are oro oron areL I for tor Its L s n I r L lime Till The absence of at atI I 1 S I thia instItution j 1 eI t t SJ the of the them I i m Cl irs that the nt act of 1 va aj n ot of their constItutional 11 c I Ii C this part ot of their reo ic r I I o 0 12 was ns supple the Ell EI I lr I cle 1 IrS was at that time that r I unlawful WIS was wasI n J und the I I r Ii M I It wi nt not Inter InterI 1 I 1 I I II lh to ask a Ques I 1 hr e I I it I J A M ti OUr church e Ii I V 1 05 allowable or that I It ItI I IY or Jt n a man to take plural lit r 1 I taI taught that I it was wasP P I 1 a ln This hairsplitting that It waa tS I r I I 1 mandatory I 1 l li S I kw w taken by I n ader 1 ii 1 M h 1 IVel wel well ns as It ItI I r ri or ct OUr church and have havea a C b by your I m r n a Look that If n a man mank manI k I t 1 4 that In the world to tot Ih t na had the advantage over overL p L 1 1 hJ hal but one wife Ind and I If ii I advantage what vas the ther 1 r rl I dont think I ever nd ad adI 11 I 3 1 1 I ra n have been told that lint lintl l j jT r L k Ic A Now New Winess Witness for tor 1 f p 11 rt 1 have hae no recollection g Ik ISk that In I It I It toes lees not notI t I marriage n I ny reo ic that the I 1 be ti t hurh or how do you OU OUn n v d I Mr 1 n It SeI must sa say that so 80 far that a Is concerned I It Is new I I I 1 hai not heart heard that view put puti rIll r U i S I r return turn to ta what whitt I was In tIn WIth the passage EI Is In 1552 a very ur vig Ig J 2 1 S ulion waR JI it Ih ti of polygamous liv Ih r 1 u dm Cu habitation The see sec 11 j j r 5 who lio hd como come among 4 Li I t arguments hod not con tJ Ii Sri 81 I dont know that they ur 5 I 1 II any Y If they did I If Ia f a 1 r 11 1 It although I heard r 1 t d a f 1 i I heart heard the thc men that lint r Ii h a rd among us d derided anti 1 4 JI 1 I heard plenty or t r that they ever tried tiled f US that we were wrong 1 arguments Wore were not sull auth sulli i b UJ n as religious people the ther they r g I t r J ii upon the tho thell ud ll the Scriptures 1 t From your our r 1 he other way 11 h f rt rl Vero P agi et Ih m sow Now the rigorous I that arose after was I 1 ri n muth like this present 11 throughout d SI s 13 t The country Was told t r II marriage system was not 1 b b Pl i d 0 with but to be 00 stamped I f es nr by force and conse Hr I t the tho and of clamor enacted d the tho IV it If f and provided special funds tl j cIt enforcement Shortly Cf f r th o If Cr this In law I th there re corn com 1 d Wb tt at was generally known as hI z at o gany raid were Im pd m mAn n were drIven n Into exile r eap p to submit to the most un lit prosecution I Lor L r t law unlawful IG cc a 3 I a 0 the off was held b by th the r z Ira t be b a 11 continuous one and s i II Wp I al to the time t gl gi t h It continued d Into nl as Any as th the prosecution h d j s Ir j proper It wa held wI s HI h t s or of co a tat ud ad be made mad separate a I ri 11 ilay every eel week every hat ht ii eory e ry fraction ot of a dl for tor Il I nail that a 1 separate count 3 5 t could be matte for r 7 7 I a I or of time and there U 5 l d 1 to tI the punishment that Chi fh 1 IF t under that arrange C M Wro Indicted ted on n a number 3 In that wa and some ot of i With the I 1 1 J that they could make the r p I rt It for tor this misdemeanor nor P II 1 lIfe liCe The result ot of lab ab U cJ 51 WP had hod 1 j reign of terror In 1 durin that time that n P f I J exile The Imprisonment L bL PPl r If men took tonk place Ilace and the y s terrorized Lr an In 1st ot of those trYing times t r had continued through 1 m ht h ron or tn years the good 1001 old oILI It Jr d at the head or of the f I eX r tr In ng hIs hl people l thus thu dill laL f under these tIt t n Id most by their arl the tho heaviest I punishment and meat but tho ho torture ot at not and exile tell fell Ibe he men but upon the M n t women Ien hll were involved In the tho ia o I and lT greater evIls th threatening 0 lr Wilford I sought his In prayer pney his hist t i torn tom I 1 SAy MY b bV grief the Ito Uw his t th Ie people presented d under p he sought his God In inI I n try II a matter of lie do n h rrt of man many ot of the tho 2 see P I I who a fOam ama to Utah Ulah to re ic rr Ir r flut Dut e or Ira a tr pf It wI has hall In Any FA tor fo the tho tP of tI will tf ct P b With which the heart hert Cw C b l oJ In Iii t aj rent ITO ITOl Jorl r with the its t a anu that he had sn n S I p It from Oud a halt th on thIs the question lie He met Ir f th lilA I country with lIh Ter h bp and ano In the tho I a month or of w What w all called the to l Now o I p dont linen lit I III In tt a bi be to tf Ir I sub Th e for this nIt record It has hIlS already been read teall and referred to several thu antI and antII I 1 do no not II iet why you ou should not It Is Isu isa u a record anti has hns been here be before fore rore the tho various s ot of house Mr n HIght on that poInt It Is III very el difficult for a 0 lawyer to tell when whan n a court will and when whon a court will not take judicial notice of certain facts and whether Iare acting under the technical rules roles n it court act under I am not advised ed but It if It is II not to you may Inay do doUK doas UK as you set ace lit about answering till miac 1 would like to nail ask you this According to general repute you OU have recently written a 1 book bouk Whether We would woul 1 take Inke JudIcial notice of that book I am d la book untitled not hot prepa prepared to saya perhaps The Now Witness for tor clod Ir Yes Ye Ir Did you OU write that Mr Tee sir Ir on Anti nd when Mc I forget torget IIO how It must be some Bomo three or tour four years ago ngo Mr Ir Within the tho last three or four years T lr Yes loa sir 31 11 have hae you OU nn an ex tra copy ot of that book In the city with you ou Mr floberto have no COP copy of that book bu but I shall b be pleased to see Ste that U n copy Is furnished you OU I 1 will see Bee that thata n a copy Is hero In u a day or two Mr ir dont knol whether we would have a right to Consider It or not Mr says BIlS ho hc Is II willing we should Mr fr yes os It was ns pub to be rend as widely ns as IO Morrl Aro you wilting willing that we 0 shall take thAt book antI con lder It Mr Ir alt str perfectly to ethor with the article published in tile Era but In the tho event of 01 that l Era m article submitted I would like to have all ot of It submitted The article do you OU mean Mr mean menn the article ro re to several tunes In tc testimony StUd In article I wrote on onlie the lie subject ot of polygamy nm Mr reply you OU made Mr nobert Y II sir The brief article from the Era of tin Ma ISS b by John M bluer Heiner on m a 1 brief prelude and hon thun a lengthy let letter letter ter of It John M t on Mol Mor arid then comment on that by Elder r n 13 It That Is III now with our testimony Exhibit C Mr Mr Chairman In continuation ot of the tho hIstorical sketch I nm am ranking milking or of this controversy I call attention to the New York dent n a weekly religious paper In Now New York under dato ot of 3 1598 The Tho following question was sub to President Woodruff It Is alleged that advice which you OU publicly gave gao to the members ot of the Church to refraIn from such plural marriages t Is not observed Replying to lint charge Mr Woodruff In that ion In the tho manifesto to which you OU refer I said That as laws have 1111 boen enacted by Congress forbidding plural plum I which laws have been pronounced as b by the lie court ot of lust resort I hereby declare mY Intention to sub Rub submit mit to laws and to use UBe m my In with the members lit of time the Church Churchover over oer which I preside to have hae them do likewise Continuing President Woodruff said This promise ha been faithfully kept and no one line has entered Into pluraL mar claire by my permission since the man was vaa issued There Thero never cero laws of such fuch n a character affecting ida rela relations had existed over oer halt haIr f a con cen century tury so closely observed as al those ting to marriages havo boom been nut I cannot say fey that everyone who vho was mil living In plural marriage before the Is issuance ot of the manifesto has then strictly refrained from such auch The was fas the tho o occa ca non flon ot of his hla saying I A that Mr O occasion was that the tho New York Independent was pub publishing lishing n a symposium of letters from Ulah sectarian mInisters upon the sub Bub jeet of 01 the revival of In Utah III as It was called and among Inquiries that were submItted was this one to Mr dr Wilford Wood ru It to which lie he made this answer I have Just rent read The cial announcement of the Mormon formon Church that It IL would discontinue plural and observe the tho III lawo 9 enacted b l the United States with reference t to that subject ct laid the tho foundation Corthe people of Utah to abandon their controversies and ond come together und and reo so cure Statehood for tor Utah In the ho summer Hummer ot of 1891 In July Jul ns as I remember it II the act Will was passed by Congress nail the people of Utah were wert authorized to form torm n a ContI tUllon In that enabling act lIot It was 1 said 11 1 1 with reference to Said convention shall provide by ordinance Irrevocably without tIme tho con consent nt of the United 11 States and the tho of 01 said StAte first that o or religious sentiment shall bE secured and that no inhabitant ot of said Mid State shall ever be molested In person or property on a ot of his hisor Or her mode modo of religious worship J That polygamous or plural marriages ore are for tor forever ever eer prohibited That lii Is the tho language ot of the enabling act nel and that was the tho demand and the only demand that was made b by the Congress Contess of the United d states upon the people of Utah with to that matter Mr Ir the time ot of that act Mr was It understood that these thele polygamous relations had lI n discontinued Mr Mi so Oj yes elf sir I think that was the tho under understand understandIng Ing Mr fr understandIng that these polygamous relations had been discontinued and not only the thc hold holdIng lag Ing ot of these women ns as whet but also alO living In unlawful relations with them Mr That was WILlI th time general status ot of the tho case that was wall the under understanding standing Mr It not understood that the tho people universally throughout that Territory had accepted last as 19 th their lr biJ belief Mi In sir I do not knoW knO that thra there was wall any understanding upon that particular point upon the tho part ot of tho ho people but all as a matter ot of tact fact Mr Ir was made hero here yesterday you will remember to n a statement manila le b by the tho hoed bead of the tho Church Mr Wood ru tt that he under the proclamation to applY not only to the ho taking ot of wives but also to tot t the e living with those tholo women who had already wen been taken ns as wives Mr fr Yc Yes sir that than was published and generally under tood to tie 00 the explanation or of the Prest President dent I think upon th the main facts Mr Jorris Was It und tood that bt at tM tho time this act WitS was the tho pee PlC Ille ot of Utah were wera living In Compliance with Willi that Jcl act Mr lichens I l do o not that that was wa ull the he ca easo but I think It ras fas quito the case caseI I toke take It sir that the Con or of ortho the tho United States is compo tampered el or of reason lIbl mII who have seine t tor or of course lOUII of human nature and that the of nn an Institution that thal had covered than half a 1 century In the lifetime or of n a Stat you yota could riot not hope hON since the tho tin II to Its ins was embedded bcd ed In the con convictions on ot of the tho could not hope that there would be at all aid arA universal abandonment ot of th reo iv i lations but It waa generally understood that the manifesto to reached ached these reds ions and I have some omo remarks to sub flub malt on that presently when we l et fur tur lh r llong Mr lr Landis Dill Did not th t D I u gate from Utah In lie address hIi he deli cred state that polygamy hail not only been abandoned us as n a but orad erad so a belief Mr tr I not sir 1110 I 10 riOt not think the Congre of the tbt United SI SInus H Undertook tn t nn and 1 I do not think th the gentleman Mr fr had hadan an any such sueh und ne as that Mr r Landis I My recollection lit is that lint Mr Ir In the tho address addre he hi dolly ered cred l at that time line before the Houf of at stated l that polygamy lied hid riot not ani only IlIen heen abandoned os as n a but eradicated os as a w bo lIet lie Senator r I will state what I did say on eu that I stated that thal when Waco oro called u up for tor JetON the tho and when the tho Iu upon that list were ached them that It developed that man pee pea pIe who had been Imn with the church no longer bIt believed ed tho lie practice ot of polygamy tl tim be rl right ht lint stal ment W I hn tl upon acts within m my People leopie como come before betON the tho courts routh for ion And thY they would ho asked aske l whether tho they In polygamy and fUld th they would state tint th they y thu not Theae people the courts otter after the tho proclamation and stated staled that the they no longer believed In poly polygamy gamy gam and that was the tho reference to which I made I 1 have hao hf heard rd hy by many Mormons In the course or of on an examination In court COUlt In relAtion to mill vidual Instances h Landis I do not remember that you OU stated that you OU formed your our conclusion Ion sion In that WI t sy tit 11 I I thInk that I stated that hail como before the courts and hat had made mado th these I think that was wall stated BUtted Mr Mr Ir Chairman I 1 take tako I It from the nature of oC the question of the ho judge judio here hera on mn 11 o Morris Mr Morris Murrill lily My qu question was simply by what was 49 said yesterday Mr I think I understood thu tho nature of oC your Our question sir and I to answer that Mr Ir Morris Morrl It 11 was not prompted by byaD aD army desire to interfere with your macat In nn any way I simply referred to that was said yesterday and to what you had to say about It lair Mr Yes but I take It that the In the question qUNtion would be that tha Iho absence or of a clause In the enabling act the Iho disruption or of tue tho tam tamal aly al relations that come colne from lbs tho plural marriages of 11 tho he Past grew gew out or of the 1 belief lIef that those thoe relations hail In abandoned that therefore It was RS not thought necessary nry to Include such Buch sucha a provision the enabling oct act It was wall also universally the tho that plural marriages h hid |