History of Salt Lake City, Part 59

Author: Tullidge, Edward Wheelock
Publication date: 1886
Publisher: Salt Lake City, Star printing company
Number of Pages: 1194

USA > Utah > Salt Lake County > Salt Lake > History of Salt Lake City > Part 59

Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).

" At the period of the Reformation in Germany, during the early part of the 16th century, those great reformers, Luther, Melancthon, Zwingle, and Bucer, held a solemn consultation at Wittenburg, on the question, "Whether it is con- trary to the Divine law for a man to have two wives at once ?" and decided unan- imously that it was not ; and upon the authority of the decision, Philip, Land- grave of Hesse, actually married a second wife, his first being still alive. This fact is recorded in D'Aubigne's History of the Reformation, and by other authors of that period.

" Dr. Hugo Grotius, a celebrated Dutch jurist and statesman and most emi- nent law-writer of the seventeenth century, states ' the Jew's laws allow a plur- ality of wives to one man.'

" Hon. John Selden, a distinguished English author and statesman, a mem- ber of Parliament for 1624, and who represented the University of Oxford in the Long Parliament of 1640, in his work entitled, ' Uxor Hebraica,' the Hebrew Wife, says that ' polygamy was allowed, not only among the Hebrews, but in most other nations throughout the world ; and that monogamy is a modern and a European custom, almost unknown to the ancient world.'

" Dr. Samuel Puffendorf, proffessor of law in the University of Hiedelberg, in Germany, and afterwards of Lund, in Sweden, who wrote during the latter

452

HISTORY OF SALT LAKE CITY.

part of the 17th century, in his great work on the law of nature and nations, says that " the Mosaic law was so far from forbidding this custom (polygamy) that it seems in several places to suppose it ; ' and in another place he says, in reference to the rightfulness thereof, ' the polygamy of the fathers, under the old covenant, is an argument which ingenious men must confess to be unanswerable.'

" Rev. Gilbert Burnet, Bishop of Salisbury, the particular friend of William III., who was eminent among both historians and theologians, wrote a tract upon this subject, near the beginning of the 18th century. 'The tract was written on the question, ' Is a plurality of wives in any case lawful under the gospel ?'"

The Hon. Delegate cited passages from the tracts and learned arguments from the pens of eminent Christian divines allowing polygamy to disciples whose faith and conscience had been educated by the Hebrew Scriptures to the adoption of plural marriage. And Mr. Hooper's argument was sonorous with a purer consti- tutional tone from the fact that he himself, like these divines, was in his own life a strict monogamist : it was purely the Hon. Delegate's Constitutional plea for the religious liberty of a conscientious people whom he represented before the Assembly of the Nation. The close of his argument on polygamy and the peror- ation of this remarkable speech shall be preserved in their historical entirety ;-

" Rev. David A. Allen, D. D., a Congregationalist, and a missionary of the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions, after a professional res- idence of twenty-five years in Hindostan, published a work in 1856, entitled ' India, Ancient and Modern,' in which he says, PP. 551-3 :

" ' Polygamy is practised in India among the Hindoos, the Mohammedans, the Zoroastricans, and the Jews. It is allowed and recognized by the institutes of Menu, by the Koran, by the Zendavesta, and, the Jews believe, by their scrip- tures, the Old Testament. It is recognized by all the courts in India, native and English. The laws of the British Parliament recognize polygamy among all these classes, when the marriage connection has been formed according to the princi- ples of their religion and to their established forms and usages. The marriage of a Hindoo or a Mohammedan with his second or third wife is just as valid and as legally binding on all parties as his marriage with his first wife; just as valid as the marriage of any Christian in the Church of England.

* This man cannot divorce any of his wives if he would, and it would be great in- justice and cruelty to them and their children if he should. * * * His having become a Christian and embraced a purer faith will not release him from those obligations in view of the English Government and courts, or of the native population. Should he put them away, or all but one, they will still be legally his wives, and cannot be married to another man. And further, they have done nothing to deserve such unkindness, cruelty, and disgrace at his hands. * So far from receiving polygamy as morally wrong, they not unfre_ quently take a second or third wife with much reluctance, and from a painful sense of duty to perpetuate their name, their family and their inheritance.'

" In an appendix to this work, Dr. Allen informs the world that the subject of polygamy had been brought before the Calcutta Missionary Conference, a body composed of the missionaries of the various missionary societies of Great Britain and America, and including Baptists, Congregationalists, Episcopalians,

453

HISTORY OF SALT LAKE CITY.

Methodists, Presbyterians, and others, in consequence of the application of Chris- tian converts, who, having several wives each, to whom they had been legally married, now desired admittance into the Christian Churches. After frequent consultation and much consideration, the conference, says Dr. Allen, came unan- imously to the following conclusion :

" 'If a convert, before becoming a Christian, has married more wives than one, in accordance with the practice of the Jewish and primitive Christian churches, he shall be permitted to keep them all, but such a person is not eligible to any office in the church.'

" These facts, as Dr. Allen asserts them, have a direct and important bearing upon this bill and the accompanying report. They prove that one of its main charges, that polygamy is abhorrent to every Christian nation, is false, for the British Empire is a Christian nation, and Hindostan is an integral part of that empire, as much so as its American provinces are, or as Ireland is. Hindostan is a civilized country, with schools and colleges, and factories and railroads, and telegraphs and newspapers. Yet the great mass of the people, comprising more than eighty millions, are polygamists, and as such they are recognized and pro- tected by the laws of the British Parliament, and the courts of the Queen's Bench ; and the English and American missionaries of the gospel who reside there, and have resided there many years, and who know the practical working of polygamy, have assembled together in solemn conference and unanimously pronounced it to be right, and in accordance with the practice of the primitive Christian churches ; and the French, the Spanish, the Dutch, the Portuguese, and other Christian nations are known to pursue a similar policy, and to allow the different peoples under their governments, the free and unmolested enjoyment of their own religions and their own marriage system, whether they are monogamous or polygamous.

" I trust, Mr. Speaker, that I have not wearied your patience by this citation of learned authorities upon the antiquity and universality of the polygamic doc- trines. My object in this part of my argument is not to prove that polygamy is right or wrong, but simply to illustrate that a doctrine, the practice of which has repeatedly been commanded by the Almighty ; which was the rule of life with the Jews at the time they were the chosen people of God, and were, in all things, governed by His dictation ; which has among its supporters many of the most eminent writers of the Christian church of all ages, and which is now sanctioned by law and usage in many of the Christianized provinces of the British Empire, is not wrong in itself. It is a doctrine, the practice of which, from the preced- ents cited, is clearly not inconsistent with the highest purity of character, and the most exemplary Christian life. My opponents may argue that it is unsuited to the civilization of the age, or is the offspring of a religious delusion ; but if so, its remedy is to be sought through persuasion, and not by the exercise of force ; it is the field for the missionary and not for the jurist or soldier. It is a noble and a Christian work to purify and enlighten a benighted soul ; to lift up those who are fallen and ready to perish; but from all the pulpits of the land comes up the cry that the fields are white for the harvest, while the laborers are few. So soon, however, as the Luthers, the Melancthons, the Whitfields of to-day, have

454

HISTORY OF SALT LAKE CITY.

wiped out the immorality, licentiousness and crime of older communities, and have made their average morality equal to that of the city of Salt Lake, let them transfer their field of labor to the wilds of Utah, and may God forever prosper the right.

" I trust, Mr. Speaker, that men abler and more learned in law than I, will discuss the legal monstrosities of this bill, fraught with evil, as it is, not only to the citizen of Utah, but to the nation at large ; but must be pardoned for calling special attention to the seventh section, which gives to a single officer, the United States marshal, with the clerk of the court, the absolute right of selecting a jury ; and, further, to the tenth section, which provides that persons entertaining an objectionable religious theory-not those who have been guilty of the practice of polygamy, but who have simply a belief in the abstract theory of plural marriage-shall be disqualified as jurors.

" To see what a fearful blow this is at the very foundation of our liberties ; what a disastrous precedent for future tyranny, let us recall for a moment the his- tory of the trial by jury ; something with which all are as familiar as with the deca- logue, but which, like the ten commandments, may occasionally be recalled with profit. Jury trial was first [known as a trial per pais ; by the country ; and the theory was, that when a crime has been committed, the whole community came together and sat in judgment upon the offender. This process becoming cumber- some as the population increased, twelve men were drawn by lot from the country, thus securing, as was supposed, a representation of the average public sentiment of the whole country, and which was further secured by requiring the finding of the jury to be unanimous.

"A fair trial by jury, by our Anglo-Saxon ancestors, was regarded as so pre- cious, that in Magna Charta it is more than once insisted on as the principal bul- wark of English liberty.

" Blackstone says of it: 'It is the glory of the English law. It is the most transcendent privilege which any subject can enjoy or wish for, that he cannot be affected either in his property, his liberty, or his person, but by the unanimous consent of twelve of his neighbors and equals ; a provision which has, under Providence, secured the just liberties of this nation for a long succession of ages.'

" Our own people have been no whit behind the English in their high appre- ciation of the trial by jury. In the original Federal Constitution, it was provided simply that the ' trial of all crimes, except in cases of impeachment, shall be by jury.' The framers of the Constitution considered that the meaning of ' trial by jury' was sufficiently settled by long established usage and legal precedent, and that by the provision just cited was sufficient. But such was not the view of the people. One of the most serious objections to the adoption of the Constitution by the States was its lack of clearness upon this most vital point, and Alexander Hamilton, in one of the ablest and most carefully considered numbers of The Federalist, endeavored to explain away this objection. The Constitution was adopted, but the nation was not satisfied ; and one of the carliest amendments to that instrument further provided that 'no person shall be held to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous crime unless on presentment or indictment of a grand jury ' and that ' in all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the

45 5

HISTORY OF SALT LAKE CITY.

right to a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been pre- viously ascertained by law.'

" Thus, Mr. Speaker, it will be observed with what scrupulous solicitude our ancestors watched over this great safeguard of the liberties of the people. Noth- ing was left to inference or established precedent, but to every citizen was guaran- teed in this inost solemn manner an impartial trial by a jury of his neighbors and his peers, residents of the district where the offence was charged.

" Now, sir, is there any member of this House who will claim or pretend that the provisions of this bill are not in violation of this most sacred feature in our bill of rights? The trial by jury by this bill is worse than abolished, for its form -a sickening farce-remains, while its spirit is utterly gone. A packed jury is worse than no jury at all. The merest tyro in law, knows that the essence of a trial by jury consists in the fact that the accused is tried by a jury drawn by lot from among his neighbors; a jury drawn without previous knowledge, choice, or selection on the part of the Government ; a jury which will be a fair epitome of the district where the offence is charged, and thus such a tribunal, as will agree to no verdict except such as, substantially, the whole community would agree to, if present and taking part in the trial. Any other system of trial by jury is a mockery and a farce. The standard of public morality varies greatly in a country so vast as ours, and the principle of a jury trial recognizes this fact, and wisely provides, in effect, that no person shall be punished who, when brought to the bar of public opinion in the community where the alleged offence is committed, is not adjudged to have been guilty of a crime. This most unconstitutional and wicked bill before us, defies all these well established principles and strikes at the root of the dearest right of the citizen. I have an earnest and abiding faith in the bright future of my native land; but if our national career, as we may fondly hope, shall stretch out before us unending glories, it will be because of the prompt and decisive rebuke, by the representatives of the people here, of all such legisla- tion as that sought in the bill before us.

" I have touched more fully, Mr. Speaker, upon the feature of the bill vir- tually abolishing jury trial, than upon any other, because of its more conspicuous dis- regard of constitutional right. But the whole bill, from first to last, is most dam- nable in its provisions, and most unworthy of consideration by the representatives of a free people. This is an age of great religious toleration. This bill recalls the fearful days of the Spanish inquisition, or the days when, in New England, Quakers were persecuted or banished, and witches burned at the stake. It is but a short time since the country hailed with satisfaction a treaty negotiated on the part of a Pagan nation through the efforts of a former member of this body, and whose recent death has filled our hearts with sadness, whereby the polygamous Chinese emigrants to our shores are protected in the enjoyment of their idolatrous faith, and may erect their temples, stocked with idols, and perform their, to us, heathenish worship in every part of our land unquestioned. And while the civil- ized nations of Europe have combined to sustain and perpetuate a heathen na- tion practising polygamy in its lowest form, and are hailing with acclamation the approach of its head, the American Congress is actually deliberating over a bill

756

HISTORY OF SALT LAKE CITY.

which contemplates the destruction of an industrious people, and the expulsion of the great organizer of border civilization. Can it be possible that the national Congress will even for a moment, seriously contemplate the persecution or anni- hilation of an integral portion of our citizens, whose industry and material devel- opment are the nation's pride, because of a slight difference in their religious faith ? A difference, too, not upon the fundamental truths of our common Chris- tianity but because of their conscientious adherence to what was once no impropriety even, but a virtue ? This toleration in matters of religion, which is perhaps the most conspicuous feature of our civilization, arises not from any indifference to the sacred truths of Christianity, but from an abiding faith in their impregnability -a national conviction that truth is mighty and will prevail. We have adopted as our motto the sentiment of Paul ; ' Try all things ; prove all things, and hold fast to that which is good.' The ancient Jewish rabbi, in his serene confidence that God would remember his own, was typical of the spirit of our age : ' Refrain from these men and let them alone, for if this counsel or this work be of God, ye cannot overthrow it ; but if it be of men, it will come to nought.'

" I have the honor of representing here a constituency probably the most vigorously lied about of any people in the nation. I.should insult the good sense of this House and of the American people did I stoop to a refutation of the countless falsehoods which have been circulated for years in reference to the peo- ple of Utah. These falsehoods have a common origin-a desire to plunder the treasury of the nation. They are the children of a horde of bankrupt specula- tors, anxious to grow rich through the sacrifice even of human life. During the administration of Mr. Buchanan, a Mormon war was inaugurated, in great meas- ure through the statements of Judge W. W. Drummond, a man of infamous char- acter and life, and who is cited as authority in the report accompanying this bill. His statement, as there published, that the Mormons had destroyed all the records, papers, etc., of the supreme Federal court of the Territory, and grossly insulted the Federal officers for opposing such destruction, was, as I have been informed by unquestionable authority, one of, if not the principal cause of the so-called Mormon war. An army was sent to Utah ; twenty or thirty millions of dollars were expended, before the Government bethought itself to inquire whether such statements were true ; then inquiry was made, and it was learned that the whole statement was entirely false; that the records were perfect and unimpaired. Whereupon the war ended, but not until colossal fortunes were accumulated by the hangers-on and contractors for the army, who had incited the whole affair. These men, and numerous would-be imitators, long for the return of that golden age. Since the railroad was completed, many of the American people have looked for themselves. They see in Utah the most peaceful and persistently industrious people on the continent. They judge the tree by its fruits. They read that a community given up to lust does not build factories and fill up the land with thrifty farms. That a nation of thieves and murderers do not live without intox- icating liquors, and become famous for the products of their dairies, orchards, and gardens. A corrupt tree bringeth not forth the fruits of temperance, Chris- tianity, industry and order.

" Mr. Speaker, those who have been so kind and indulgent as to follow me thus far will have observed that I have aimed, as best I might, to show-

457

HISTORY OF SALT LAKE CITY.

" I. That under our Constitution we are entitled to be protected in the full and free enjoyment of our religious faith.

" 2. That our views of the marriage relation are an essential portion of our religious faith.

"3. That in considering the cognizance of the marriage relation as within the province of church regulations, we are practically in accord with all other Chris- tian denominations.

" 4. That in our views of the marriage relation as a part of our religious belief, we are entitled to immunity from persecution under the Constitution if such views are sincerely held ; that if such views are erroneous, their eradication must be by argument and not by force.

"5. That of our sincerity we have both by words, and works, and sufferings, given for nearly 40 years, abundant proof.

"6. That the bill, in practically abolishing trial by jury, as well as in many other respects, is unconstitutional, uncalled for, and in direct opposition to that toleration in religious belief which is characteristic of the nation and the age.

" It is not permitted, Mr. Speaker, that any one man should sit as the judge of another as regards his religious belief. This is a matter which rests solely be- tween each individual and his God. The responsibility cannot be shifted or di- vided. It is a matter outside the domain of legislative action. The world is full of religious error and delusion, but its eradication is the work of the moralist and not of the legislator. Our Constitution throws over all sincere worshippers, at whatever shrine, its guarantee of absolute protection. The moment we assume to judge of the truthfulness or error of any creed, the constitutional guarantee is a mockery and a sham.

" Three times have my people been dispersed by mob violence, and each time they have arisen stronger from the conflict ; and now the doctrine of vio- lence is proposed in Congress. It may be the will of the Lord that, to unite and purify us, it is necessary for further violence and blood. If so, we humbly and reverently submit to the will of Him in whose hands are all the issues of human life. Heretofore we have suffered from the violence of the mob; now, the mob are to be clothed in the authority of an unconstitutional and oppressive law. If this course be decided upon, I can only say that the hand that smites us smites the most sacred guarantee of the Constitution, and the blind Samson, breaking the pillars, pulls down upon friend and foe alike the ruins of the State."

758

HISTORY OF SALT LAKE CITY .; "

CHAPTER L.

PASSAGE OF THE CULLOM BILL IN THE HOUSE. SALT LAKE CITY EXCITED

BY THE NEWS. MASS MEETING AT THE TABERNACLE. MEMORIAL TO CONGRESS FROM THE MORMON COMMUNITY, AFFIRMING POLYGAMY AS A DIVINE LAW TO THEM, AND REVIEWING THE UNCONSTITUTIONAL FEA- TURES OF THE BILL. RESOLUTIONS. A RARE PURITANIC SPECTACLE.

The Cullom bill was passed in the House the same day that Hooper delivered his speech. He immediately telegraphed the fact home. Mormondom was aroused in a moment. The excitement was intense. A burning indignation against Congress possessed the men and women alike, and there was good reason for this righteous indignation, for not only did the bill contemplate its own exe- cution, in the most summary manner, by the arbitrary will of the courts, but troops were expected to be necessary to intimidate the people.

The Mormon leaders alone were cool and self-possessed. Brigham Young was not moved from his wonted serenity by the prospect of the inevitable conflict between himself and the man who had conquered the South, and who had already boasted that he would do as much for Mormondom.

The Cullom bill had passed the House, but it had not yet passed the Senate. There was the bare chance that, if the people arose en masse, and manifested to the country that earnest apostolic spirit so becoming of them, the Cullom Bill might die in the Senate. The Gentiles of Utah, however, looked upon this as the Mormon " forlorn hope," and decided, beyound all question, that Senator Cragin would prosecute the action through the Senate to a successful issue, as surely as had General Cullom done in the House.

But the Mormon people still trusted in the Lord. At midday of the 31st of March, according to previous notice, the people began to flock en masse towards Temple Block, to protest against the recent action of the House, of Congress, and to petition the Senate not to pass the Cullom Bill. At one o'clock every seat and window of the tabernacle was packed with spectators, the doorways were crowded, and around the building was a vast multitude that could not find en- trance. Mayor D. H. Wells was chosen to preside over the meeting. Apostles Orson Pratt, John Taylor, George Q. Cannon and others addressed the people, after which the following memorial to Congress was unanimously adopted :

"To the Honorable the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States, in Congress Assembled :

"GENTLEMEN :- It is with no ordinary concern that we have learned of the passage by the House of Representatives of the House Bill No. 1,089, entitled "A bill in aid of the execution of the laws in Utah, and for other purposes," commonly known as " The Cullom Bill," against which we desire to enter our

459

HISTORY OF SALT LAKE CITY.

most earnest and unqualified protest, and appeal against its passage by the Senate of the United States, or beg its reconsideration by the House of Representatives. We are sure you will bear with us while we present for your consideration some of . the reasons why this bill should not become law.

" Gentlemen of the Senate and House of Representatives, of the 150,000 estimated population of the Territory of Utah, it is well known that all except from 5,000 to 10,000 are members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, usually called Mormons. These are essentially the people of this Terri- tory, they have settled it, reclaimed the desert waste, cultivated it, subdued the Indians, opened means of communication, made roads, built cities, and brought into being a new State to add lustre to the national galaxy of our glorious Union. And we, the people who have done this, are believers in the principle of plural marriage or polygamy, not simply as an elevating social relationship, and a pre- ventive of many terrible evils which afflict our race, but as a principle revealed by God, underlying our every hope of eternal salvation and happiness in heaven. We believe in the pre-existence of the spirits of men ; that God is the author of our being ; that marriage is ordained as the legitimate source by which mankind obtain an existence in this probation on the earth ; that the marriage relation ex- ists and extends throughout eternity, and that without it no man can obtain an ex- altation in the celestial kingdom of God. The revelation commanding the prin- ciple of plural marriage, given by God through Joseph Smith, to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, in its first paragraph has the following language : ' Behold, I reveal unto you a new and everlasting covenant ; and if ye abide no. that covenant, then are ye damned ; for none can reject this covenant and be per- mitted to enter into my glory.' With this language before us, we cannot view plural marriage in any other light than as a vital principle of our religion. Let the revelation appear in the eyes of others as it may, to us it is a divine command, of equal force with any ever given by the Creator of the world to his children in the flesh.

Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.

History of Salt Lake City, Part 59

Author: Tullidge, Edward Wheelock Publication date: 1886 Publisher: Salt Lake City, Star printing company Number of Pages: 1194

Author: Tullidge, Edward Wheelock
Publication date: 1886
Publisher: Salt Lake City, Star printing company
Number of Pages: 1194