OCR Text |
Show respect any mandate of either the Constitution or the laws of this country. - . . In persuance of this assumption a simple order from him last autumn ' caused some thousands . of Mormon Democrats to vote the Republican ticket. Had Reed Smoot been a Democrat he woiild have had to do the same. And should this president next year, decide to support the Democratic ticket every Republican Mormon, including Reed Smoot, would have to obey. , " ' ' . This the Senate and the New York. Tribune approves. ap-proves. ' V " V ' ' '. ': ." Before the Mormons .ever made polygamy a tenet, there was something in their system which neither the State of Ohio,' nor Missouri, nor Illinois could tolerate. They have never changed or modified modi-fied any claim . which they made then. The system stands as it was fashioned by. Joseph Smith. The approval of it by the United States Senate and the great journals of the East is simply by indirection a condemnation of those old hard-headed men of those three great States. . . - " Some of the leaders of the institution in Utah have reduced perjury to an exact science and the breaking of covenants to a fine art, but, still the unsupported un-supported word of Reed Smoot is worth to Eastern Senators and great . journalists more than whole reams of the evidence of honest men. Queer, is it nott . I , . THE TESTIMONY THAT COUNTS. ; The New York Tribune approves of the verdict f the Senate in the Smoot case and in an extended editorial justifies its approval. The closing words of the article are as follows : The Senator from Utah is a monogamist, and he sol-mnJy sol-mnJy declares that he is using all his . influence to sus-Itain sus-Itain the ehurch 's new policy of monogamy. He reports that wolvgaray is disappearing among his co-rehgionists, and that the church's former antagonism to the Federal Govern-inent Govern-inent is disappearing with it. Wb hall not be suspected of , holding a brief for Mormonism, yet we can see the force ' of Mr. Smoot 's suggestion that reform within the church Is the surest method of combating plural marriage and can Uso see -the injustice of trying to saddle the onus of the ehurch 's past sins on one who seems to be doing his best to , bring it Into line with law and . enlightened modern senti-jueni. senti-jueni. ; That 6hows how difficult it is to successfully ,combat the crimes of the heads of the Mormon ichurch. Mr. Smoot 's "solemn declaration" that he in "nsine his influence to sustain the church's new policy of monogamy," counts for the truth in the ' 'East ' f ! "What do our Mormon friends in Utah think of, ,!t? Does it not read like a side-splitting joke to them! And what is this new policy of monogamy which the New York paper refers to t Is it apparent anywhere in Utaht Do the Saints find it outlined in any of their sacred books! Do they find it empha sized in the lives of any of the high officers of the ( church ! Have not five of their apostles that we all j know taken new wives since the manifesto! ' ' "When the "Woodruff manifesto was published jmany polygamists divided their property with their plural wives and separated from them. Two years 'later a band of the apostles went about the State and commanded such men to resume their old relations. re-lations. The words of the order were, "Live your re-ligionl" re-ligionl" Has any one in Utah ever heard of Reed Smoot disapproving that work, or heard from feim one protest against the new marriages that are go-,ing go-,ing on! y "When he pointed out to the Senate that polygamous polyg-amous families were disappearing in Utah, what did he mean! Simply that the old known polyg-' polyg-' amists were emigrating to Canada apd Mexico. Then ! about his contention "that reform within the church ' is the surest method of combating plural mar-iriage," mar-iriage," when is that reform to begin! Are there ' any signs .of it at present! In the lives of what men I or in the pages of what book ean it be found! I ! Then about the "former antagonism of the church";. -why should not the church be appeased! ap-peased! Its cardinal principle is that the head of the church is the mouthpiece of Almighty God ; the ac- five mouthpiece, one who communes daily with God delivprs his mandates to the world, and by vir-so-af tfut xektbnJliijajmthjjiece i not bound -. r . ,. " 1 ' ' |