Show I 1 THE RECEIVER TO BS BE APPOINTED I 1 the supreme court of utah m without ill any dissenting voice has dee decided aled I 1 to appoint a receiver ot of church property upon the tile application of counsel for government I 1 no so amount of 11 adverse criticism I 1 can affect this decree nor can any good result follow tho the upbraiding ot of the court for its manifestly unjust action except in this that the deop people I 1 e who are wronged by the statute of spoliation should not submit without a solemn protest submit they must of course but they have the right nay it itis is their duty to let all concerned in tilis this barbaric work of confiscation understand that the people know I 1 I 1 how bow cruel and unnecessary ie is this invasion masion of constitutional guarantees if men bear without remonstrance the tyrannous t cannous exercise of leg isla tive and judicial er auto autocrat craW I 1 eoon soon learn to make their first vicious experiments precedent for continued and augmented inhumanity the legislation under which this invasion of vested tested rights is made is a danger dangerous og act for spoliation and desecration deso crai tiou it is not it cannot be justified by any one reasoning under the light of nineteenth century civilize tion ifft if it can bo justly done against f the Ilor mormon mort church it can bo be done against the catholics if the state id is justified by the spirit of the age ap in a work of confiscation to check the supposed growing power of any ecclesiastical organization we are dangerously near to achour when divine di vino worship I 1 it selin tho th abstract may be forbidden ae as leading men to a divided allegiance between their country and their creator a time akin to that of the french revolution in which inal in fidelity to god will be a test of fidelity to the state the judicial interpretation of this act instead of being a check upon ini inhumanity and robber robbery is a direct 4 IL nd yet unnecessary continuation of I 1 the evil work the first step toward I 1 the absorption of the tile church property is the appointment of a receiver nothing in the act of spoliation nothing in ita its judici judicial interpretation trill will cause the receiver to feel feet any scruples ec with the endorsement of Con congress ress and the courts presumed in advance lie will feel that he is under no check and vi will ill be subject to no harsh critic criticism crit icim iem the reference in the courts opinion on to the practice prevailing in a former age ge ia is significant if the brutalities tali ties of lawmaking law making and I 1 jurisprudence of rf elx six hundred years 5 ears aeo ago must be invoked to support tilis this astounding procedure it is a fair wr inference that modern methods nieth and I 1 modern advancement have bare brought civilized nations beyond and above spoliation but if the barbarism of the thirteenth century can be vae used d here and now a justification for this unholy deed congress and the courts 4 can despoil jew jea a and withhold from them the adequate protection of tile laws for that too was tho the practice I 1 eix aix hundred undred li years ago thi th is proceeding will bo viewed sometime as tho the rew resource of men nien who ho were obliged I 1 to use unreasonable means in order to accomplish t an unreasonable purpose |