CHAPTER XXIII. Social Aspects Of Polygamy

There was something compulsory about all phases of life in Utah during Brigham Young's regime—the form of employment for the men, the domestic regulations of the women, the church duties each should perform, and even the location in the territory which they should call their home. Not only did large numbers of the foreign immigrants find themselves in debt to the church on their arrival, and become compelled in this way to labor on the "public works" as they might be ordered, but the skilled mechanics who brought their tools with them in most cases found on their arrival that existence in Utah meant a contest with the soil for food. Even when a mechanic obtained employment at his trade it was in the ruder branches.

Mormon authorities have always tried to show that Americans have predominated in their community. Tullidge classes the population in this order: Americans, English, Scandinavian (these claim one-fifth of the Mormon population of Utah), Scotch, Welsh, Germans, and a few Irish, French, Italians, and Swiss. The combination of new-comers and the emigrants from Nauvoo made a rude society of fanatics,* before whom there was held out enough prospect of gain in land values (scarcely one of the immigrants had ever been a landowner) to overcome a good deal of the discontent natural to their mode of life, and who, in religious matters, were held in control by a priesthood, against whom they could not rebel without endangering that hope of heaven which had induced them to journey across the ocean. There are roughness and lawlessness in all frontier settlements, but this Mormon community differed from all other gatherings of new population in the American West. It did not migrate of its own accord, attracted by a fertile soil or precious ores; it was induced to migrate, not without misrepresentation concerning material prospects, it is true, but mainly because of the hope that by doing so it would share in the blessings and protection of a Zion. The gambling hell and the dance hall, which form principal features of frontier mining settlements, were wanting in Salt Lake City, and the absence of the brothel was pointed to as evidence of the moral effect of polygamy.

* "I have discovered thus early (1852) that little deference is paid to women. Repeatedly, in my long walk to our boarding house, I was obliged to retreat back from the [street] crossing places and stand on one side for men to cross over. There are said to be a great many of the lower order of English here, and this rudeness, so unusual with our countrymen, may proceed from them."— Mrs. Ferris. "Life among the Mormons."

The system of plural marriages left its impress all over the home life of the territory. Many of the Mormon leaders, as we have seen, had more wives than one when they made their first trip across the plains, and the practice of polygamy, while denied on occasion, was not concealed from the time the settlement was made in the valley to the date of its public proclamation. In the early days, a man with more than one wife provided for them according to his means. Young began with quarters better than the average, but modest in their way, and finally occupied the big buildings which cost him many thousands of dollars. If a man with several wives had the means to do so, he would build a long, low dwelling, with an outside door for each wife, and thus house all under the same roof in a sort of separate barracks. When Gunnison wrote, in 1852, there were many instances in which more than one wife shared the same house when it contained only one apartment, but he said: "It is usual to board out the extra ones, who most frequently pay their own way by sewing, and other female employments." Mrs. Ferris wrote: "The mass of the dwellings are small, low, and hutlike. Some of them literally swarmed with women and children, and had an aspect of extreme want of neatness . . . . One family, in which there were two wives, was living in a small hut—three children very sick [with scarlet fever]—two beds and a cook-stove in the same room, creating the air of a pest-house."*

* "Life among the Mormons," pp. 111, 145.

Hyde, describing the city in 1857, thus enumerated the home accommodations of some of the leaders:—"A very pretty house on the east side was occupied by the late J. M. Grant and his five wives. A large barrack-like house on the corner is tenanted by Ezra T. Benson and his four ladies. A large but mean-looking house to the west was inhabited by the late Parley P. Pratt and his nine wives. In that long, dirty row of single rooms, half hidden by a very beautiful orchard and garden, lived Dr. Richard and his eleven wives. Wilford Woodruff and five wives reside in another large house still further west. O. Pratt and some four or five wives occupy an adjacent building. Looking toward the north, we espy a whole block covered with houses, barns, gardens, and orchards. In these dwell H. C. Kimball and his eighteen or twenty wives, their families and dependents."*

* "Mormonism," p. 34. The number of wives of the church leaders decreased in later years. Beadle, giving the number of wives "supposed to appertain to each" in 1882, credits President Taylor with four (three having died), and the Apostles with an average of three each, Erastus Snow having five, and four others only two each.

Horace Greeley, prejudiced as he was in favor of the Mormons when he visited Salt Lake City in 1859, was forced to observe:—"The degradation (or, if you please, the restriction) of woman to the single office of childbearing and its accessories is an inevitable consequence of the system here paramount. I have not observed a sign in the streets, an advertisement in the journals, of this Mormon metropolis, whereby a woman proposes to do anything whatever. No Mormon has ever cited to me his wife's or any woman's opinion on any subject; no Mormon woman has been introduced or spoken to me; and, though I have been asked to visit Mormons in their houses, no one has spoken of his wife (or wives) desiring to see me, or his desiring me to make her (or their) acquaintance, or voluntarily indicated the existence of such a being or beings."*

* "Overland journey," p. 217.

Woman's natural jealousy, and the suffering that a loving wife would endure when called upon to share her husband's affection and her home with other women, would seem to form a sort of natural check to polygamous marriages. But in Utah this check was overcome both by the absolute power of the priesthood over their flock, and by the adroit device of making polygamy not merely permissive, but essential to eternal salvation. That the many wives of even so exalted a prophet as Brigham Young could become rebellious is shown by the language employed by him in his discourse of September 21, 1856, of which the following will suffice as a specimen:—"Men will say, 'My wife, though a most excellent woman, has not seen a happy day since I took my second wife; no, not a happy day for a year.' . . . I wish my women to understand that what I am going to say is for them, as well as all others, and I want those who are here to tell their sisters, yes, all the women in this community, and then write it back to the states, and do as you please with it. I am going to give you from this time till the 6th day of October next for reflection, that you may determine whether you wish to stay with your husbands or not, and then I am going to set every woman at liberty, and say to them, 'Now go your way, my women with the rest; go your way.' And my wives have got to do one of two things; either round up their shoulders to endure the afflictions of this world, and live their religion, or they may leave, for I will not have them about me. I will go into heaven alone, rather than have scratching and fighting all around me. I will set all at liberty. What, first wife too?' Yes,I will liberate you all. I know what my women will say; they will say, 'You can have as many women as you please, Brigham.' But I want to go somewhere and do something to get rid of the whiners . . . . Sisters, I am not joking."*

* Journal of Discourses, Vol. IV, p. 55.

Grant, on the same day, in connection with his presentation of the doctrine of blood atonement, declared that there was "scarcely a mother in Israel" who would not, if they could, "break asunder the cable of the Church in Christ; and they talk it to their husbands, to their daughters, and to their neighbors, and say that they have not seen a week's happiness since they became acquainted with that law, or since their husbands took a second wife."* The coarse and plain-spoken H. C. Kimball, in a discourse in the Tabernacle, November 9, 1856, thus defined the duty of polygamous wives, "It is the duty of a woman to be obedient to her husband, and, unless she is, I would not give a damn for all her queenly right or authority, nor for her either, if she will quarrel and lie about the work of God and the principles of plurality."**

* Ibid, P. 52.

** Deseret News, Vol. VI, p. 291.

Gentile observers were amazed, in the earlier days of Utah, to see to what lengths the fanatical teachings of the church officers would be accepted by women. Thus Mrs. Ferris found that the explanation of the willingness of many young women in Utah to be married to venerable church officers, who already had harems, was their belief that they could only be "saved" if married or sealed to a faithful Saint, and that an older man was less likely to apostatize, and so carry his wives to perdition with him, than a young one; therefore "it became an object with these silly fools to get into the harems of the priests and elders."

If this advantage of the church officers in the selection of new wives did not avail, other means were employed,*as in the notorious San Pete case. The officers remaining at home did not hesitate to insist on a fair division of the spoils (that is, the marriageable immigrants), as is shown by the following remarks of Heber C. Kimball to some missionaries about starting out: "Let truth and righteousness be your motto, and don't go into the world for anything but to preach the Gospel, build up the Kingdom of God, and gather the sheep into the fold. You are sent out as shepherds to gather the sheep together; and remember that they are not your sheep; they belong to Him that sends you. Then don't make a choice of any of those sheep; don't make selections before they are brought home and put into the fold. You understand that. Amen." Mr. Ferris thus described the use of his priestly power made by Wilford Woodruff, who, as head of the church in later years, gave out the advice about abandoning polygamy: "Woodruff has a regular system of changing his harem. He takes in one or more young girls, and so manages, after he tires of them, that they are glad to ask for a divorce, after which he beats the bush for recruits. He took a fresh one, about fourteen years old, in March, 1853, and will probably get rid of her in the course of the ensuing summer." **

* Conan Doyle's story, "A Study in scarlet," is founded on the use of this power.

** "Utah and the Mormons," p. 255.

Mrs. Waite thus relates a conversation she had with a Mormon wife about her husband going into polygamy:—"'Oh, it is hard,' she said, 'very hard; but no matter, we must bear it. It is a correct principle, and there is no salvation without it. We had one [wife] but it was so hard, both for my husband and myself, that we could not endure it, and she left us at the end of seven months. She had been with us as a servant several months, and was a good girl; but as soon as she was made a wife she became insolent, and told me she had as good a right to the house and things as I had, and you know that didn't suit me well. But,' continued she, 'I wish we had kept her, and I had borne everything, for we have GOT TO HAVE ONE, and don't you think it would be pleasanter to have one you had known than a stranger?'"*

* "The Mormon Prophet," p. 260. Many accounts of the feeling of first wives regarding polygamy may be found in this book and in Mrs. Stenhouse's "Tell it All."

The voice which the first wife had in the matter was defined in the Seer (Vol. I, p. 41). If she objected, she could state her objection to President Young, who, if he found the reason sufficient, could forbid the marriage; but if he considered that her reason was not good, then the marriage could take place, and "he [the husband] will be justified, and she will be condemned, because she did not give them unto him as Sarah gave Hagar to Abraham, and as Rachel and Leah gave Bilhah and Zilpah to their husband, Jacob." Young's dictatorship in the choice of wives was equally absolute. "No man in Utah," said the Seer (Vol. I, p. 31), "who already has a wife, and who may desire to obtain another, has any right to make any proposition of marriage to a lady until he has consulted the President of the whole church, and through him obtained a revelation from God as to whether it would be pleasing in His sight."

The authority of the priesthood was always exerted to compel at least every prominent member of the church to take more wives than one. "For a man to be confined to one woman is a small business," said Kimball in the Tabernacle, on April 4, 1857. This influence coerced Stenhouse to take as his second wife a fourteen-year-old daughter of Parley P. Pratt, although he loved his legal wife, and she had told him that she would not live with him if he married again, and although his intimate friend, Superintendent Cooke, of the Overland Stage Company, to save him, threatened to prosecute him under the law against bigamy if he yielded.* Another illustration, given by Mrs. Waite, may be cited. Kimball, calling on a Prussian immigrant named Taussig one day, asked him how he was doing and how many wives he had, and on being told that he had two, replied, "That is not enough. You must take a couple more. I'll send them to you." The narrative continues:—

* When Mr. and Mrs. Stenhouse left the church at the time of the "New Movement" their daughter, who was a polygamous wife of Brigham Young's son, decided with the church and refused even to speak with her parents.

"On the following evening, when the brother returned home, he found two women sitting there. His first wife said, 'Brother Taussig' (all the women call their husbands brother), 'these are the Sisters Pratt.' They were two widows of Parley P. Pratt. One of the ladies, Sarah, then said, 'Brother Taussig, Brother Kimball told us to call on you, and you know what for.' 'Yes, ladies,' replied Brother Taussig, 'but it is a very hard task for me to marry two' The other remarked, 'Brother Kimball told us you were doing a very good business and could support more women.' Sarah then took up the conversation, 'Well, Brother Taussig, I want to get married anyhow.' The good brother replied, 'Well, ladies, I will see what I can do and let you know."*

* "The Mormon Prophet," p. 258.

Brother Taussig compromised the matter with the Bishop of his ward by marrying Sarah, but she did not like her new home, and he was allowed to divorce her on payment of $10 to Brigham Young!

Each polygamous family was, of course, governed in accordance with the character of its head: a kind man would treat all his wives kindly, however decided a preference he might show for one; and under a brute all would be unhappy. Young, in his earlier days at Salt Lake City, used to assemble all his family for prayers, and have a kind word for each of the women, and all ate at a common table after his permanent residences were built. "Brigham's wives," says Hyde, "although poorly clothed and hard worked, are still very infatuated with their system, very devout in their religion, very devoted to their children. They content themselves with his kindness as they cannot obtain his love."* He kept no servants, the wives performing all the household work, and one of them acting as teacher to her own and the others' children. As the excuse for marriage with the Mormons is childbearing, the older wives were practically discarded, taking the place of examples of piety and of spiritual advisers.

* "Mormonism," p. 164.

** How far this doctrine was not observed may be noted in the following remarks of H. C. Kimball in the Tabernacle, on February 1, 1857: "They [his wives] have got to live their religion, serve their God, and do right as well as myself. Suppose that I lose the whole of them before I go into the spiritual world, but that I have been a good, faithful man all the days of my life, and lived my religion, and had favor with God, and was kind to them, do you think I will be destitute there? No. The Lord says there are more there than there are here. They have been increasing there; they increase there a great deal faster than they do here, because there is no obstruction. They do not call upon the doctors to kill their offspring. In this world very many of the doctors are studying to diminish the human race. In the spiritual world . . . we will go to Brother Joseph . . . and he will say to us, 'Come along, my boys, we will give you a good suit of clothes. Where are your wives?' 'They are back yonder; they would not follow us.' 'Never mind,' says Joseph, 'here are thousands; have all you want.'"—Journal of Discourses, Vol. IV, p. 209.

A summing up of the many-sided evils of polygamy was thus presented by President Cleveland in his first annual message:— "The strength, the perpetuity, and the destiny of the nation rests upon our homes, established by the law of God, guarded by parental care, regulated by parental authority, and sanctified by parental love. These are not the homes of polygamy.

"The mothers of our land, who rule the nation as they mould the characters and guide the actions of their sons, live according to God's holy ordinances, and each, secure and happy in the exclusive love of the father of her children, sheds the warm light of true womanhood, unperverted and unpolluted, upon all within her pure and wholesome family circle. These are not the cheerless, crushed, and unwomanly mothers of polygamy.

"The fathers of our families are the best citizens of the Republic. Wife and children are the sources of patriotism, and conjugal and parental affection beget devotion to the country. The man who, undefiled with plural marriage, is surrounded in his single home with his wife and children, has a status in the country which inspires him with respect for its laws and courage for its defence. These are not the fathers of polygamous families."



CHAPTER XXIV. The Fight Against Polygamy—Statehood

The first measure "to punish and prevent the practice of polygamy in the Territories of the United States" was introduced in the House of Representatives by Mr. Morrill of Vermont (Bill No. 7) at the first session of the 36th Congress, on February 15, 1860. It contained clauses annulling some of the acts of the territorial legislature of Utah, including the one incorporating the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. This bill was reported by the Judiciary Committee on March 14, the committee declaring that "no argument was deemed necessary to prove that an act could be regarded as criminal which is so treated by the universal concurrence of the Christian and civilized world," and characterizing the church incorporation act as granting "such monstrous powers and arrogant assumptions as are at war with the genius of our government." The bill passed the House on April 5, by a vote of 149 to 60, was favorably reported to the Senate by Mr. Bayard from the Judiciary Committee on June 13, but did not pass that House.

Mr. Morrill introduced his bill by unanimous consent in the next Congress (on April 8, 1862), and it was passed by the House on April 28. Mr. Bayard, from the judiciary Committee, reported it back to the Senate on June 3 with amendments. He explained that the House Bill punished not only polygamous marriages, but cohabitation without marriage. The committee recommended limiting the punishment to bigamy—a fine not to exceed $500 and imprisonment for not more than five years. Another amendment limited the amount of real estate which a church corporation could hold in the territories to $50,000. The bill passed the Senate with the negative votes of only the two California senators, and the House accepted the amendments. Lincoln signed it.

Nothing practical was accomplished by this legislation, In 1867 George A. Smith and John Taylor, the presiding officers of the Utah legislature, petitioned Congress to repeal this act, setting forth as one reason that "the judiciary of this territory has not, up to the present time, tried any case under said law, though repeatedly urged to do so by those who have been anxious to test its constitutionality." The House Judiciary Committee reported that this was a practical request for the sanctioning of polygamy, and said: "Your committee has not been able to ascertain the reason why this law has not been enforced. The humiliating fact is, however, apparent that the law is at present practically a dead letter in the Territory of Utah, and that the gravest necessity exists for its enforcement; and, in the opinion of the committee, if it be through the fault or neglect of the judiciary of that territory that the laws are not enforced, the judges should be removed without delay; and that, if the failure to execute the law arises from other causes, it becomes the duty of the President of the United States to see that the law is faithfully executed."*

* House Report No. 27, 2nd Session, 39th Congress.

In June, 1866, Senator Benjamin Wade of Ohio obtained unanimous consent to introduce a bill enacting radical legislation concerning such marriages as were performed and sanctioned by the Mormon church, but it did not pass. Senator Cragin of New Hampshire soon introduced a similar bill, but it, too failed to become a law.

In 1869, in the first Congress that met under President Grant, Mr. Cullom of Illinois introduced in the House the bill aimed at polygamy that was designated by his name. This bill was the practical starting-point of the anti-polygamous legislation subsequently enacted, as over it was aroused the feeling—in its behalf in the East and against it in Utah—that resulted in practical legislation.

Delegate Hooper made the leading speech against it, summing up his objections as follows:—

"(1) 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 conceding the cognizance of the marriage relation as within the province of church regulations, we are practically in accord with all other Christian denominations.

"(4) That in our view 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."

The bill, greatly amended, passed the House on March 23, 1870, by a vote of 94 to 32. The news of this action caused perhaps the greatest excitement ever known in Utah. There was no intention on the part of the Mormons to make any compromise on the question, and they set out to defeat the bill outright in the Senate. Meetings of Mormon women were gotten up in all parts of the territory, in which they asserted their devotion to the doctrine. The "Reformers," including Stenhouse, Harrison, Tullidge, and others, and merchants like Walker Brothers, Colonel Kahn, and T. Marshall, joined in a call for a mass-meeting at which all expressed disapproval of some of its provisions, like the one requiring men already having polygamous wives to break up their families. Mr. Godbe went to Washington while the bill was before the House, and worked hard for its modification. The bill did not pass the Senate, a leading argument against it being the assumed impossibility of convicting polygamists under it with any juries drawn in Utah.

The arrest of Brigham Young and others under the act to punish adulterers, and the proceedings against them before Judge McKean in 1871, have been noted. At the same term of the court Thomas Hawkins, an English immigrant, was convicted of the same charge on the evidence of his wife, and sentenced to imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of $500. In passing sentence, Judge McKean told the prisoner that, if he let him off with a fine, the fine would be paid out of other funds than his own; that he would thus go free, and that "those men who mislead the people would make you and thousands of others believe that God had sent the money to pay the fine; that, by a miracle, you had been rescued from the authorities of the United States."

After the passage of the Poland law, in 1874, George Reynolds, Brigham Young's private secretary, was convicted of bigamy under the law of 1862, but was set free by the Supreme Court of the territory on the ground of illegality in the drawing of the grand jury. In the following year he was again convicted, and was sentenced to imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of $500. The case was appealed to the United States Supreme Court, which rendered its decision in October, 1878, unanimously sustaining the conviction, except that Justice Field objected to the admission of one witness's testimony.

In its decision the court stated the question raised to be "whether religious belief can be accepted as a justification for an overt act made criminal by the law of the land." Next came a discussion of views of religious freedom, as bearing on the meaning of "religion" in the federal constitution, leading up to the conclusion that "Congress was deprived of all legislative power over mere opinion, but was left free to reach actions which were in violation of social duties, or subversive of good order." The court then traced the view of polygamy in England and the United States from the time when it was made a capital offence in England (as it was in Virginia in 1788), declaring that, "in the face of all this evidence, it is impossible to believe that the constitutional guaranty of religious freedom was intended to prohibit legislation in respect to this most important feature of social life." The opinion continued as follows:—"In our opinion, the statute immediately under consideration is within the legislative power of Congress. It is constitutional and valid as prescribing a rule of action for all those residing in the Territories, and in places over which the United States has exclusive control. This being so, the only question which remains is, whether those who make polygamy a part of their religion are excepted from the operation of the statute. If they are, then those who do not make polygamy a part of their religious belief may be found guilty and punished, while those who do, must be acquitted and go free. This would be introducing a new element into criminal law. Laws are made for the government of actions, and, while they cannot interfere with mere religious belief and opinions, they may with practices. Suppose one believed that human sacrifices were a necessary part of religious worship, would it be seriously contended that the civil government under which he lived could not interfere to prevent a sacrifice? Or, if a wife religiously believed it was her duty to burn herself on the funeral pile of her dead husband, would it be beyond the power of the civil government to prevent her carrying her belief into practice?

"So here, as a law of the organization of society under the exclusive dominion of the United States, it is provided that plural marriages shall not be allowed. Can a man excuse his practices to the contrary because of his religious belief? To permit this would be to make the professed doctrines of religious belief superior to the law of the land, and in effect to permit every citizen to become a law unto himself. Government could exist only in name under such circumstances.

"A criminal intent is generally an element of crime, but every man is presumed to intend the necessary and legitimate consequences of what he knowingly does. Here the accused knew he had been once married, and that his first wife was living. He also knew that his second marriage was forbidden by law. When, therefore, he married the second time, he is presumed to have intended to break the law, and the breaking of the law is the crime. Every act necessary to constitute the crime was knowingly done, and the crime was therefore knowingly committed.*

* United States Reports, Otto, Vol. III, p. 162.

P. T. Van Zile of Michigan, who became district attorney of the territory in 1878, tried John Miles, a polygamist, for bigamy, in 1879, and he was convicted, the prosecutor taking advantage of the fact that the territorial legislature had practically adopted the California code, which allowed challenges of jurors for actual bias. The principal incident of this trial was the summoning of "General" Wells, then a counsellor of the church, as a witness, and his refusal to describe the dress worn during the ceremonies in the Endowment House, and the ceremonies themselves. He gave as his excuse, "because I am under moral and sacred obligations to not answer, and it is interwoven in my character never to betray a friend, a brother, my country, my God, or my religion." He was sentenced to pay a fine, of $100, and to two days' imprisonment. On his release, the City Council met him at the prison door and escorted him home, accompanied by bands of music and a procession made up of the benevolent, fire, and other organizations, and delegations from every ward.

Governor Emery, in his message to the territorial legislature of 1878, spoke as plainly about polygamy as any of his predecessors, saying that it was a grave crime, even if the law against it was a dead letter, and characterizing it as an evil endangering the peace of society.

There was a lull in the agitation against polygamy in Congress for some years after the contest over the Cullom Bill. In 1878 a mass-meeting of women of Salt Lake City opposed to polygamy was held there, and an address "to Mrs. Rutherford B. Hayes and the women of the United States," and a petition to Congress, were adopted, and a committee was appointed to distribute the petition throughout the country for signatures. The address set forth that there had been more polygamous marriages in the last year than ever before in the history of the Mormon church; that Endowment Houses, under the name of temples, and costing millions, were being erected in different parts of the territory, in which the members were "sealed and bound by oaths so strong that even apostates will not reveal them"; that the Mormons had the balance of power in two territories, and were plotting to extend it; and asking Congress "to arrest the further progress of this evil."

President Hayes, in his annual message in December, 1879, spoke of the recent decision of the United States Supreme Court, and said that there was no reason for longer delay in the enforcement of the law, urging "more comprehensive and searching methods" of punishing and preventing polygamy if they were necessary. He returned to the subject in his message in 1880, saying: "Polygamy can only be suppressed by taking away the political power of the sect which encourages and sustains it . . . . I recommend that Congress provide for the government of Utah by a Governor and judges, or Commissioners, appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate, (or) that the right to vote, hold office, or sit on juries in the Territory of Utah be confined to those who neither practise nor uphold polygamy."

President Garfield took up the subject in his inaugural address on March 4, 1881. "The Mormon church," he said, "not only offends the moral sense of mankind by sanctioning polygamy, but prevents the administration of justice through ordinary instrumentalities of law." He expressed the opinion that Congress should prohibit polygamy, and not allow "any ecclesiastical organization to usurp in the smallest degree the functions and power, of the national government." President Arthur, in his message in December, 1881, referred to the difficulty of securing convictions of persons accused of polygamy—"this odious crime, so revolting to the moral and religious sense of Christendom"—and recommended legislation.

In the spirit of these recommendations, Senator Edmunds introduced in the Senate, on December 12, 1881, a comprehensive measure amending the antipolygamy law of 1862, which, amended during the course of the debate, was passed in the Senate on Feruary 12, 1882, without a roll-call,*and in the House on March 13, by a vote of 199 to 42, and was approved by the President on March 22. This is what is known as the Edmunds law—the first really serious blow struck by Congress against polygamy.

* Speeches against the bill were made in the Senate by Brown, Call, Lamar, Morgan, Pendleton, and Vest.

It provided, in brief, that, in the territories, any person who, having a husband or wife living, marries another, or marries more than one woman on the same day, shall be punished by a fine of not more than $500, and by imprisonment, for not more than five years; that a male person cohabiting with more than one woman shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and be subject to a fine of not more than $300 or to six months' imprisonment, or both; that in any prosecution for bigamy, polygamy, or unlawful cohabitation, a juror may be challenged if he is or has been living in the practice of either offence, or if he believes it right for a man to have more than one living and undivorced wife at a time, or to cohabit with more than one woman; that the President may have power to grant amnesty to offenders, as described, before the passage of this act; that the issue of so-called Mormon marriages born before January 1, 1883, be legitimated; that no polygamist shall be entitled to vote in any territory, or to hold office under the United States; that the President shall appoint in Utah a board of five persons for the registry of voters, and the reception and counting of votes.

To meet the determined opposition to the new law, an amendment (known as the Edmunds-Tucker law) was enacted in 1887. This law, in any prosecution coming under the definition of plural marriages, waived the process of subpoena, on affadavit of sufficient cause, in favor of an attachment; allowed a lawful husband or wife to testify regarding each other; required every marriage certificate in Utah to be signed by the parties and the person performing the ceremony, and filed in court; abolished female suffrage, and gave suffrage only to males of proper age who registered and took an oath, giving the names of their lawful wives, and promised to obey the laws of the United States, and especially the Edmunds law; disqualified as a juror or officeholder any person who had not taken an oath to support the laws of the United States, or who had been convicted under the Edmunds law; gave the President power to appoint the judges of the probate courts;* provided for escheating to the United States for the use of the common schools the property of corporations held in violation of the act in 1862, except buildings held exclusively for the worship of God, the parsonages connected therewith, and burial places; dissolved the corporation called the Perpetual Emigration Company, and forbade the legislature to pass any law to bring persons into the territory; dissolved the corporation known as the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, and gave the Supreme Court of the territory power to wind up its affairs; and annulled all laws regarding the Nauvoo Legion, and all acts of the territorial legislature.

* The first territorial legislature which met after the passage of this law passed an act practically nullifying such appointments of probate judges, but the governor vetoed it. In Beaver County, as soon as the appointment of a probate judge by the President was announced, the Mormon County Court met and reduced his salary to $5 a year.

The first members of the Utah commission appointed under the Edmunds law were Alexander Ramsey of Minnesota, A. B. Carleton of Indiana, A. S. Paddock of Nebraska, G. L. Godfrey of Iowa, and J. R. Pettigrew of Arkansas, their appointments being dated June 23, 1882.

The officers of the church and the Mormons as a body met the new situation as aggressively as did Brigham Young the approach of United States troops. Their preachers and their newspapers reiterated the divine nature of the "revelation" concerning polygamy and its obligatory character, urging the people to stand by their leaders in opposition to the new laws. The following extracts from "an Epistle from the First Presidency, to the officers and members of the church," dated October 6, 1885, will sufficiently illustrate the attitude of the church organization:—"The war is openly and undisguisedly made upon our religion. To induce men to repudiate that, to violate its precepts, and break its solemn covenants, every encouragement is given. The man who agrees to discard his wife or wives, and to trample upon the most sacred obligations which human beings can enter into, escapes imprisonment, and is applauded: while the man who will not make this compact of dishonor, who will not admit that his past life has been a fraud and a lie, who will not say to the world, 'I intended to deceive my God, my brethren, and my wives by making covenants I did not expect to keep,' is, beside being punished to the full extent of the law, compelled to endure the reproaches, taunts, and insults of a brutal judge . . . .

"We did not reveal celestial marriage. We cannot withdraw or renounce it, God revealed it, and he has promised to maintain it and to bless those who obey it. Whatever fate, then, may threaten us, there is but one course for men of God to take; that is, to keep inviolate the holy covenants they have made in the presence of God and angels. For the remainder, whether it be life or death, freedom or imprisonment, prosperity or adversity, we must trust in God. We may say, however, if any man or woman expects to enter into the celestial kingdom of our God without making sacrifices and without being tested to the very uttermost, they have not understood the Gospel . . . .

"Upward of forty years ago the Lord revealed to his church the principle of celestial marriage. The idea of marrying more wives than one was as naturally abhorrent to the leading men and women of the church, at that day, as it could be to any people. They shrank with dread from the bare thought of entering into such relationship. But the command of God was before them in language which no faithful soul dare disobey, 'For, behold, I reveal unto you a new and everlasting covenant; and if ye abide not that covenant, then are ye damned; for no one can reject this covenant, and be permitted to enter into my glory.' . . . Who would suppose that any man, in this land of religious liberty, would presume to say to his fellow-man that he had no right to take such steps as he thought necessary to escape damnation? Or that Congress would enact a law which would present the alternative to religious believers of being consigned to a penitentiary if they should attempt to obey a law of God which would deliver them from damnation?"

There was a characteristic effort to evade the law as regards political rights. The People's Party (Mormon), to get around the provision concerning the test oath for voters, issued an address to them which said: "The questions that intending voters need therefore ask themselves are these: Are we guilty of the crimes of said act; or have we THE PRESENT INTENTION of committing these crimes, or of aiding, abetting, causing or advising any other person to commit them. Male citizens who can answer these questions in the negative can qualify under the laws as voters or office-holders."

Two events in 1885 were the cause of so much feeling that United States troops were held in readiness for transportation to Utah. The first of these was the placing of the United States flag at half mast in Salt Lake City, on July 4, over the city hall, county court-house, theatre, cooperative store, Deseret News office, tithing office, and President Taylor's residence, to show the Mormon opinion that the Edmunds law had destroyed liberty. When a committee of non-Mormon citizens called at the city hall for an explanation of this display, the city marshal said that it was "a whim of his," and the mayor ordered the flag raised to its proper place.

In November of that year a Mormon night watchman named McMurrin was shot and severely wounded by a United States deputy marshal named Collin. This caused great feeling, and there were rumors that the Mormons threatened to lynch Collin, that armed men had assembled to take him out of the officers' hands, and that the Mormons of the territory were arming themselves, and were ready at a moment's notice to march into Salt Lake City. Federal troops were held in readiness at Eastern points, but they were not used. The Salt Lake City Council, on December 8, made a report denying the truth of the disquieting rumors, and declaring that "at no time in the history of this city have the lives and property of its non-Mormon inhabitants been more secure than now."

The records of the courts in Utah show that the Mormons stood ready to obey the teachings of the church at any cost. Prosecutions under the Edmunds law began in 1884, and the convictions for polygamy or unlawful cohabitation (mostly the latter) were as follows in the years named: 3 in 1884, 39 in 1885, 112 in 1886, 214 in 1887, and 100 in 1888, with 48 in Idaho during the same period. Leading men in the church went into hiding—"under ground," as it was called—or fled from the territory. As to the actual continuance of polygamous marriages, the evidence was contradictory. A special report of the Utah Commission in 1884 expressed the opinion that there had been a decided decrease in their number in the cities, and very little decrease in the rural districts. Their regular report for that year estimated the number of males and females who had entered into that relation at 459. The report for 1888 stated that the registration officers gave the names of 29 females who, they had good reason to believe, had contracted polygamous marriages since the lists were closed in June, 1887. As late as 1889 Hans Jespersen was arrested for unlawful cohabitation. As his plural marriage was understood to be a recent one, the case attracted wide attention, since it was expected to prove the insincerity of the church in making the protest against the Edmunds law principally on the ground that it broke up existing families. Jespersen pleaded guilty of adultery and polygamy, and was sentenced to imprisonment for eight years. In making his plea he said that he was married at the Endowment House in Salt Lake City, that he and his wife were the only persons there, and that he did not know who married them. His wife testified that she "heard a voice pronounce them man and wife, but didn't see any one nor who spoke." * Such were some of the methods adopted by the church to set at naught the law.

* Report of the Utah Commission for 1890, p. 23.

But along with this firm attitude, influences were at work looking to a change of policy. During the first year of the enforcement of the law it was on many sides declared a failure, the aggressive attitude of the church, and the willingness of its leaders to accept imprisonment, hiding, or exile, being regarded by many persons in the East as proof that the real remedy for the Utah situation was yet to be discovered. The Utah Commission, in their earlier reports, combated this idea, and pointed out that the young men in the church would grow restive as they saw all the offices out of their reach unless they took the test oath, and that they "would present an anomaly in human nature if they should fail to be strongly influenced against going into a relation which thus subjects them to political ostracism, and fixes on them the stigma of moral turpitude." How wide this influence was is seen in the political statistics of the times. When the Utah Commission entered on their duties in August, 1882, almost every office in the territory was held by a polygamist. By April, 1884, about 12,000 voters, male and female, had been disfranchised by the act, and of the 1351 elective officers in the territory not one was a polygamist, and not one of the municipal officers of Salt Lake City then in office had ever been "in polygamy."

The church leaders at first tried to meet this influence in two ways, by open rebuke of all Saints who showed a disposition to obey the new laws, and by special honors to those who took their punishment. Thus, the Deseret News told the brethren that they could not promise to obey the anti-polygamy laws without violating obligations that bound them to time and eternity; and when John Sharp, a leading member of the church in Salt Lake City, went before the court and announced his intention to obey these laws, he was instantly removed from the office of Bishop of his ward.

The restlessness of the flock showed itself in the breaking down of the business barriers set up by the church between Mormons and Gentiles. This subject received a good deal of attention in the minority report signed by two of the commissioners in 1888. They noted the sale of real estate by Mormons to Gentiles against the remonstrances of the church, the organization of a Chamber of Commerce in Salt Lake City in which Mormons and Gentiles worked together, and the union of both elements in the last Fourth of July celebration.

In the spring of 1890, at the General Conference held in Salt Lake City, the office of "Prophet, Seer and Revelator and President" of the church, that had remained vacant since the death of John Taylor in 1887, was filled by the election of Wilford Woodruff, a polygamist who had refused to take the test oath, while G. Q. Cannon and Lorenzo Snow, who were disfranchised for the same cause, were made respectively counsellor and president of the Twelve.* Woodruff was born in Connecticut in 1807, became a Mormon in 1832, was several times sent on missions to England, and had gained so much prominence while the church was at Nauvoo that he was the chief dedicator of the Temple there. While there, he signed a certificate stating that he knew of no other system of marriage in the church but the one-wife system then prescribed in the "Book of Doctrine and Covenants." Before the date of his promotion, Woodruff had declared that plural marriages were no longer permitted, and, when he was confronted with evidence to the contrary brought out in court, he denied all knowledge of it, and afterward declared that, in consequence of the evidence presented, he had ordered the Endowment House to be taken down.

* Lorenzo Snow was elected president of the church on September 13, 1898, eleven days after the death of President Woodruff, and he held that position until his death which occurred on October 10, 1901.

Governor Thomas, in his report for 1890, expressed the opinion that the church, under its system, could in only one way define its position regarding polygamy, and that was by a public declaration by the head of the church, or by action by a conference, and he added, "There is no reason to believe that any earthly power can extort from the church any such declaration." The governor was mistaken, not in measuring the purpose of the church, but in foreseeing all the influences that were now making themselves felt.

The revised statutes of Idaho at this time contained a provision (Sec. 509) disfranchising all polygamists and debarring from office all polygamists, and all persons who counselled or encouraged any one to commit polygamy. The constitutionality of this section was argued before the United States Supreme Court, which, on February 3, 1890, decided that it was constitutional. The antipolygamists in Utah saw in this decision a means of attacking the Mormon belief even more aggressively than had been done by means of the Edmunds Bill. An act was drawn (Governor Thomas and ex-Governor West taking it to Washington) providing that no person living in plural or celestial marriage, or teaching the same, or being a member of, or a contributor to, any organization teaching it, or assisting in such a marriage, should be entitled to vote, to serve as a juror, or to hold office, a test oath forming a part of the act. Senator Cullom introduced this bill in the upper House and Mr. Struble of Iowa in the House of Representatives. The House Committee on Territories (the Democrats in the negative) voted to report the bill, amended so as to make it applicable to all the territories. This proposed legislation caused great excitement in Mormondom, and petitions against its passage were hurried to Washington, some of these containing non-Mormon signatures.

As a further menace to the position of the church, the United States Supreme Court, on May 19, affirmed the decision of the lower court confiscating the property of the Mormon church, and declaring that church organization to be an organized rebellion; and on June 21, the Senate passed Senator Edmunds's bill disposing of the real estate of the church for the benefit of the school fund.*

* After the admission of Utah as a state, Congress passed an act restoring the property to the church.

The Mormon authorities now realized that the public sentiment of the country, as expressed in the federal law, had them in its grasp. They must make some concession to this public sentiment, or surrender all their privileges as citizens and the wealth of their church organization. Agents were hurried to Washington to implore the aid of Mr. Blaine in checking the progress of the Cullom Bill, and at home the head of the church made the concession in regard to polygamy which secured the admission of the territory as a state.

On September 25, 1890, Woodruff, as President of the church, issued a proclamation addressed "to whom it may concern," which struck out of the NECESSARY beliefs and practices of the Mormon church, the practice of polygamy.

This important step was taken, not in the form of a "revelation," but simply as a proclamation or manifesto. It began with a solemn declaration that the allegation of the Utah Commission that plural marriages were still being solemnized was false, and the assertion that "we are not preaching polygamy nor permitting any person to enter into its practice." The closing and important

part of the proclamation was as follows:—

"Inasmuch as laws have been enacted by Congress, which laws have been pronounced constitutional by the court of last resort, I hereby declare my intention to submit to these laws, and to use my influence with the members of the church over which I preside to have them do likewise.

"There is nothing in my teachings to the church, or in those of my associates, during the time specified, which can be reasonably construed to inculcate or encourage polygamy, and when any elder of the church has used language which appeared to convey any such teachings he has been promptly reproved.

"And now I publicly declare that my advice to the Latter-Day Saints is to refrain from contracting any marriage forbidden by the law of the land."

On October 6, the General Conference of the church, on motion of Lorenzo Snow, unanimously adopted the following resolution:—

"I move that, recognizing Wilford Woodruff as President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, and the only man on the earth at the present time who holds the keys of the sealing ordinances, we consider him fully authorized, by virtue of his position, to issue the manifesto that has been read in our hearing, and which is dated September 24, 1890, and as a church in general conference assembled we accept his declaration concerning plural marriages as authoritative and binding."

This action was reaffirmed by the General Conference of October 6, 1891.

Of course the church officers had to make some explanation to the brethren of their change of front. Cannon fell back on the "revelation" of January 19, 1841, which Smith put forth to excuse the failure to establish a Zion in Missouri, namely, that, when their enemies prevent their performing a task assigned by the Almighty, he would accept their effort to do so. He said that "it was on this basis" that President Woodruff had felt justified in issuing the manifesto. Woodruff explained: "It is not wisdom for us to make war upon 65,000,000 people . . . . The prophet Joseph Smith organized the church; and all that he has promised in this code of revelations the "Book of Doctrine and Covenants" has been fulfilled as fast as time would permit. THAT WHICH IS NOT FULFILLED WILL BE." Cannon did explain that the manifesto was the result of prayer, and Woodruff told the people that he had had a great many visits from the Prophet Joseph since his death, in dreams, and also from Brigham Young, but neither seems to have imparted any very valuable information, Joseph explaining that he was in an immense hurry preparing himself "to go to the earth with the Great Bridegroom when he goes to meet the Bride, the Lamb's wife."

Two recent incidents have indicated the restlessness of the Mormon church under the restriction placed upon polygamy. In 1898, the candidate for Representative in Congress, nominated by the Democratic Convention of Utah, was Brigham H. Roberts. It was commonly known in Utah that Roberts was a violator of the Edmunds law. A Mormon elder, writing from Brigham, Utah, in February, 1899, while Roberts's case was under consideration at Washington, said, "Many prominent Mormons foresaw the storm that was now raging, and deprecated Mr. Roberts's nomination and election."* This statement proves both the notoriety of Roberts's offence, and the connivance of the church in his nomination, because no Mormon can be nominated to an office in Utah when the church authorities order otherwise. When Roberts presented himself to be sworn in, in December, 1899, his case was referred to a special committee of nine members. The report of seven members of this committee found that Roberts married his first wife about the year 1878; that about 1885 he married a plural wife, who had since born him six children, the last two twins, born on August 11, 1897; that some years later he married a second plural wife, and that he had been living with all three till the time of his election; "that these facts were generally known in Utah, publicly charged against him during his campaign for election, and were not denied by him." Roberts refused to take the stand before the committee, and demurred to its jurisdiction on the ground that the hearing was an attempt to try him for a crime without an indictment and jury trial, and to deprive him of vested rights in the emoluments of the office to which he was elected, and that, if the crime alleged was proved, it would not constitute a sufficient cause to deprive him of his seat, because polygamy is not enumerated in the constitution as a disqualification for the office of member of Congress. The majority report recommended that his seat be declared vacant. Two members of the committee reported that his offence afforded constitutional ground for expulsion, but not for exclusion from the House, and recommended that he be sworn in and immediately expelled. The resolution presented by the majority was adopted by the House by a vote of 268 to 50.**

* New York Evening Post, February 20, 1899.

** Roberts was tried in the district court in Salt Lake City, on April 30, 1900, on the charge of unlawful cohabitation. The case was submitted to the jury of eight men, without testimony, on an agreed statement of facts, and the jury disagreed, standing six for conviction and two for acquittal.

The second incident referred to was the passage by the Utah legislature in March, 1901, of a bill containing this provision:

"No prosecution for adultery shall be commenced except on complaint of the husband or wife or relative of the accused with the first degree of consanguinity, or of the person with whom the unlawful act is alleged to have been committed, or of the father or mother of said person; and no prosecution for unlawful cohabitation shall be commenced except on complaint of the wife, or alleged plural wife of the accused; but this provision shall not apply to prosecutions under section 4208 of the Revised Statutes, 1898, defining and punishing polygamous marriages."

This bill passed the Utah senate by a vote of 11 to 7, and the house by a vote of 174 to 25. The excuse offered for it by the senator who introduced it was that it would "take away from certain agitators the opportunity to arouse periodic furors against the Mormons"; that more than half of the persons who had been polygamists had died or dissolved their polygamous relations, and that no good service could be subserved by prosecuting the remainder. This law aroused a protest throughout the country, and again the Mormon church saw that it had made a mistake, and on the 14th of March Governor H. M. Wells vetoed the bill, on grounds that may be summarized as declaring that the law would do the Mormons more harm than good. The most significant part of his message, as indicating what the Mormon authorities most dread, is contained in the following sentence: "I have every reason to believe its enactment would be the signal for a general demand upon the national Congress for a constitutional amendment directed solely against certain conditions here, a demand which, under the circumstances, would assuredly be complied with."

The admission of Utah as a state followed naturally the promulgation by the Mormon church of a policy which was accepted by the non-Mormons as putting a practical end to the practice of polygamy. For the seventh time, in 1887, the Mormons had adopted a state constitution, the one ratified in that year providing that "bigamy and polygamy, being considered incompatible with 'a republican form of government,' each of them is hereby forbidden and declared a misdemeanor." The non-Mormons attacked the sincerity of this declaration, among other things pointing out the advice of the Church organ, while the constitution was before the people, that they be "as wise as serpents and as harmless as doves." Congress again refused admission.

On January 4, 1893, President Harrison issued a proclamation granting amnesty and pardon to all persons liable to the penalty of the Edmunds law "who have, since November 1, 1890, abstained from such unlawful cohabitation," but on condition that they should in future obey the laws of the United States. Until the time of Woodruff's manifesto there had been in Utah only two political parties, the People's, as the Mormon organization had always been known, and the Liberal (anti-Mormon). On June 10, 1894, the People's Territorial Central Committee adopted resolutions reciting the organization of the Republicans and Democrats of the territory, declaring that the dissensions of the past should be left behind and that the People's party should dissolve. The Republican Territorial Committee a few days later voted that a division of the people on national party lines would result only in statehood controlled by the Mormon theocracy. The Democratic committee eight days later took a directly contrary view. At the territorial election in the following August the Democrats won, the vote standing: Democratic, 14,116; Liberal, 7386; Republican, 6613.

It would have been contrary to all political precedent if the Republicans had maintained their attitude after the Democrats had expressed their willingness to receive Mormon allies. Accordingly, in September, 1891, we find the Republicans adopting a declaration that it would be wise and patriotic to accept the changes that had occurred, and denying that statehood was involved in a division of the people on national party lines.

All parties in the territory now seemed to be manoeuvring for position. The Morman newspaper organs expressed complete indifference about securing statehood. In Congress Mr. Caine, the Utah Delegate, introduced what was known as the "Home Rule Bill," taking the control of territorial affairs from the governor and commission. This was known as a Democratic measure, and great pressure was brought to bear on Republican leaders at Washington to show them that Utah as a state would in all probability add to the strength of the Republican column. When, at the first session of the 53d Congress, J. L. Rawlins, a Democrat who had succeeded Caine as Delegate, introduced an act to enable the people of Utah to gain admission for the territory as a state, it met with no opposition at home, passed the House of Representatives on December 13, 1893, and the Senate on July 10, 1894 (without a division in either House), and was signed by the President on July 16. The enabling act required the constitutional convention to provide "by ordinance irrevocable without the consent of the United States and the people of that state, that perfect toleration of religious sentiment shall be secured, and that no inhabitant of said state shall ever be molested in person or property on account of his or her mode of religious worship; PROVIDED, that polygamous or plural marriages are forever prohibited."

The constitutional convention held under this act met in Salt Lake City on March 4, 1895, and completed its work on May 8, following. In the election of delegates for this convention the Democrats cast about 19,000 votes, the Republicans about 21,000 and the Populists about 6500. Of the 107 delegates chosen, 48 were Democrats and 59 Republicans. The constitution adopted contained the following provisions:—

"Art. 1. Sec. 4. The rights of conscience shall never be infringed. The state shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; no religious test shall be required as a qualification for any office of public trust, or for any vote at any election; nor shall any person be incompetent as a witness or juror on account of religious belief or the absence thereof. There shall be no union of church and state, nor shall any church dominate the state or interfere with its functions. No public money or property shall be appropriated for or applied to any religious worship, exercise, or instruction, or for the support of any ecclesiastical establishment.

"Art. 111. The following ordinance shall be irrevocable without the consent of the United States and the people of this state: Perfect toleration of religious sentiment is guaranteed. No inhabitant of this state shall ever be molested in person or property on account of his or her mode of religious worship; but polygamous or plural marriages are forever prohibited."

This constitution was submitted to the people on November 5, 1895, and was ratified by a vote of 31,305 to 7687, the Republicans at the same election electing their entire state ticket and a majority of the legislature. On January 4, 1896, President Cleveland issued a proclamation announcing the admission of Utah as a state. The inauguration of the new state officers took place at Salt Lake City two days later. The first governor, Heber M. Wells,* in his inaugural address made this declaration: "Let us learn to resent the absurd attacks that are made from time to time upon our sincerity by ignorant and prejudiced persons outside of Utah, and let us learn to know and respect each other more, and thus cement and intensify the fraternal sentiments now so widespread in our community, to the end that, by a mighty unity of purpose and Christian resolution, we may be able to insure that domestic tranquillity, promote that general welfare, and secure those blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity guaranteed by the constitution of the United States."

* Son of "General" Wells of the Nauvoo Legion.

The vote of Utah since its admission as a state has been cast as follows:—

************* REPUBLICAN **** DEMOCRAT 1895. Governor 20,833 18,519 1896. President 13,491 64,607 1900. Governor 47,600 44,447 1900. President 47,089 44,949



CHAPTER XXV. The Mormonism Of To-Day

An intelligent examination of the present status of the Mormon church can be made only after acquaintance with its past history, and the policy of the men who have given it its present doctrinal and political position. The Mormon power has ever in view objects rather than methods. It always keeps those objects in view, while at times adjusting methods to circumstances, as was the case in its latest treatment of the doctrine of polygamy. The casual visitor, making a tour of observation in Utah, and the would-be student of Mormon policies who satisfies himself with reading their books of doctrine instead of their early history, is certain to acquire little knowledge of the real Mormon character and the practical Mormon ambition, and if he writes on the subject he will contribute nothing more authentic than does Schouler in his "History of the United States" wherein he calls Joseph Smith "a careful organizer," and says that "it was a part of his creed to manage well the material concerns of his people, as they fed their flocks and raised their produce." Brigham Young's constant cry was that all the Mormons asked was to be left alone. Nothing suits the purposes of the heads of the church today better than the decrease of public attention attracted to their organization since the Woodruff manifesto concerning polygamy. In trying to arrive at a reasonable decision concerning their future place in American history, one must constantly bear in mind the arguments which they have to offer to religious enthusiasts, and the political and commercial power which they have already attained and which they are constantly strengthening.

The growth of Utah in population since its settlement by the Mormons has been as follows, accepting the figures of the United States census:—

1850 11,380 1860 40,273 1870 86,786 1880 143,963 1890 207,905 1900 276,749

The census of 1890 (the religious statistics of the census of 1900 are not yet available) shows that, of a total church membership of 128,115 in Utah, the Latter-Day Saints numbered 118,201.

What may be called the Mormon political policy embraces these objects: to maintain the dictatorial power of the priesthood over the present church membership; to extend that membership over the adjoining states so as to acquire in the latter, first a balance of power, and later complete political control; to continue the work of proselyting throughout the United States and in foreign lands with a view to increasing the strength of the church at home by the immigration to Utah of the converts.

That the power of the Mormon priesthood over their flock has never been more autocratic than it is to-day is the testimony of the best witnesses who may be cited. A natural reason for this may be found in the strength which always comes to a religious sect with age, if it survives the period of its infancy. We have seen that in the early days of the church its members apostatized in scores, intimate acquaintance with Smith and his associates soon disclosing to men of intelligence and property their real objects. But the church membership in and around Utah to-day is made up of the children and the grandchildren of men and women who remained steadfast in their faith. These younger generations are therefore influenced in their belief, not only by such appeals as what is taught to them makes to their reason, but by the fact that these teachings are the teachings which have been accepted by their ancestors. It is, therefore, vastly more difficult to convince a younger Mormon to-day that his belief rests on a system of fraud than it was to enforce a similar argument on the minds of men and women who joined the Saints in Ohio or Illinois. We find, accordingly, that apostasies in Utah are of comparatively rare occurrence; that men of all classes accept orders to go on missions to all parts of the world without question; and that the tithings are paid with greater regularity than they have been since the days of Brigham Young.

The extension of the membership of the Mormon church over the states and territories nearest to Utah has been carried on with intelligent zeal. The census of 1890 gives the following comparison of members of Latter-Day Saints churches and of "all bodies" in the states and territories named:—

******* L.D. SAINTS **** ALL BODIES *** Idaho******* 14,972 **** 24,036 Arizona***** 6,500 **** 26,972 Nevada****** 525 **** 5,877 Wyoming***** 1,336 **** 11,705 Colorado**** 1,762 **** 86,837 New Mexico** 456 **** 105,749

The political influence of the Mormon church in all the states and territories adjacent to Utah is already great, amounting in some instances to practical dictation. It is not necessary that any body of voters should have the actual control of the politics of a state to insure to them the respect of political managers. The control of certain counties will insure to them the subserviency of the local politicians, who will speak a good word for them at the state capital, and the prospect that they will have greater influence in the future will be pressed upon the attention of the powers that be. We have seen how steadily the politicians of California at Washington stood by the Mormons in their earlier days, when they were seeking statehood and opposing any federal control of their affairs. The business reasons which influenced the Californians are a thousand times more effective to-day. The Cooperative Institution has a hold on the Eastern firms from which it buys goods, and every commercial traveller who visits Utah to sell the goods of his employers to Mormon merchants learns that a good word for his customers is always appreciated. The large corporations that are organized under the laws of Utah (and this includes the Union Pacific Railroad Company) are always in some way beholden to the Mormon legislative power. All this sufficiently indicates the measures quietly taken by the Mormon church to guard itself against any further federal interference.

The mission work of the Mormon church has always been conducted with zeal and efficiency, and it is so continued to-day. The church authorities in Utah no longer give out definite statistics showing the number of missionaries in the field, and the number of converts brought to Utah from abroad. The number of

missionaries at work in October, 1901, was stated to me by church officers at from fourteen hundred to nineteen hundred, the smaller number being insisted upon as correct by those who gave it. As nearly as could be ascertained, about one-half this force is employed in the United States and the rest abroad. The home field most industriously cultivated has been the rural districts of the Southern states, whose ignorant population, ever susceptible to "preaching" of any kind, and quite incapable of answering the Mormon interpretation of the Scriptures, is most easily lead to accept the Mormon views. When such people are offered an opportunity to improve their worldly condition, as they are told they may do in Utah, at the same time that they can save their souls, the bait is a tempting one. The number of missionaries now at work in these Southern states is said to be much smaller than it was two years ago. Meanwhile the work of proselyting in the Eastern Atlantic states has become more active. The Mormons have their headquarters in Brooklyn, New York, and their missionaries make visits in all parts of Greater New York. They leave a great many tracts in private houses, explaining that they will make another call later, and doing so if they receive the least encouragement. They take great pains to reach servant girls with their literature and arguments, and the story has been published* of a Mormon missionary who secured employment as a butler, and made himself so efficient that his employer confided to him the engagement of all the house servants; in time the frequent changes which he made aroused suspicion, and an investigation disclosed the fact that he was a Mormon of good education, who used his position as head servant to perform effective proselyting work. By promise of a husband and a home of her own on her arrival in Utah, this man was said to have induced sixty girls to migrate from New York City to that state since he began his labors.

* New York Sun, January 27, 1901.

The Mormons estimate the membership of their church throughout the world at a little over 300,000. The numbers of "souls" in the church abroad was thus reported for the year ending December 31, 1899, as published in the Millennial Star:—

Great Britain 4,588 Scandinavia 5,438 Germany 1,198 Switzerland 1,078 Netherlands 1,556

These figures indicate a great falling off in the church constituency in Europe as compared with the year 1851, when the number of Mormons in Great Britain and Ireland was reported at more than thirty thousand. Many influences have contributed to decrease the membership of the church abroad and the number of converts which the church machinery has been able to bring to Utah. We have seen that the announcement of polygamy as a necessary belief of the church was a blow to the organization in Europe. The misrepresentation made to converts abroad to induce them to migrate to Utah, as illustrated in the earlier years of the church, has always been continued, and naturally many of the deceived immigrants have sent home accounts of their deception. A book could be filled with stories of the experiences of men and women who have gone to Utah, accepting the promises held out to them by the missionaries,—such as productive farms, paying business enterprises; or remunerative employment,—only to find their expectations disappointed, and themselves stranded in a country where they must perform the hardest labor in order to support themselves, if they had not the means with which to return home. The effect of such revelations has made some parts of Europe an unpleasant field for the visits of Mormon missionaries.

The government at Washington, during the operation of the Perpetual Emigration Fund organization, realized the evil of the introduction of so many Mormon converts from abroad. On August 9, 1879, Secretary of State William M. Evarts sent out a circular to the diplomatic officers of the United States throughout the world, calling their attention to the fact that the organized shipment of immigrants intended to add to the number of law-defying polygamists in Utah was "a deliberate and systematic attempt to bring persons to the United States with the intent of violating their laws and committing crimes expressly punishable under the statute as penitentiary offences," and instructing them to call the attention of the governments to which they were accredited to this matter, in order that those governments might take such steps as were compatible with their laws and usages "to check the organization of these criminal enterprises by agents who are thus operating beyond the reach of the law of the United States, and to prevent the departure of those proposing to come hither as violators of the law by engaging in such criminal enterprises, by whomsoever instigated." President Cleveland, in his first message, recommended the passage of a law to prevent the importation of Mormons into the United States. The Edmunds-Tucker law contained a provision dissolving the Perpetual Emigration Company, and forbidding the Utah legislature to pass any law to bring persons into the territory. Mormon authorities have informed me that there has been no systematic immigration work since the prosecutions under the Edmunds law. But as it is conceded that the Mormons make practically no proselytes among then Gentile neighbors, they must still look largely to other fields for that increase of their number which they have in view.

As a part of their system of colonizing the neighboring states and territories, they have made settlements in the Dominion of Canada and in Mexico. Their Canadian settlement is situated in Alberta. A report to the Superintendent of Immigration at Ottawa, dated December 30, 1899, stated that the Mormon colony there comprised 1700 souls, all coming from Utah; and that "they are a very progressive people, with good schools and churches." When they first made their settlement they gave a pledge to the Dominion government that they would refrain from the practice of polygamy while in that country. In 1889 the Department of the Interior at Ottawa was informed that the Mormons were not observing this pledge, but investigation convinced the department that this accusation was not true. However, in 1890, an amendment to the criminal law of the Dominion was enacted (clause 11, 53 Victoria, Chap. 37), making any person guilty of a misdemeanor, and liable to imprisonment for five years and a fine of $500, who practises any form of polygamy or spiritual marriage, or celebrates or assists in any such marriage ceremony.

The Secretario de Fomento of Mexico, under date of May 4, 1901, informed me that the number of Mormon colonists in that country was then 2319, located in seven places in Chihuahua and Sonora. He added: "The laws of this country do not permit polygamy. The government has never encouraged the immigration of Mormons, only that of foreigners of good character, working people who may be useful to the republic. And in the contracts made for the establishment of those Mormon colonies it was stipulated that they should be formed only of foreigners embodying all the aforesaid conditions."

No student of the question of polygamy, as a doctrine and practice of the Mormon church, can reach any other conclusion than that it is simply held in abeyance at the present time, with an expectation of a removal of the check now placed upon it. The impression, which undoubtedly prevails throughout other parts of the United States, that polygamy was finally abolished by the Woodruff manifesto and the terms of statehood, is founded on an ignorance of the compulsory character of the doctrine of polygamy, of the narrowness of President Woodruff's decree, and of the part which polygamous marriages have been given, by the church doctrinal teachings, in the plan of salvation. The sketch of the various steps leading up to the Woodruff manifesto shows that even that slight concession to public opinion was made, not because of any change of view by the church itself concerning polygamy, but simply to protect the church members from the loss of every privilege of citizenship. That manifesto did not in any way condemn the polygamous doctrine; it simply advised the Saints to submit to the United States law against polygamy, with the easily understood but unexpressed explanation that it was to their temporal advantage to do so. How strictly this advice has since been lived up to—to what extent polygamous practices have since been continued in Utah—it is not necessary, in a work of this kind, to try to ascertain. The most intelligent non-Mormon testimony obtainable in the territory must be discarded if we are to believe that polygamous relations have not been continued in many instances. This, too, would be only what might naturally be expected among a people who had so long been taught that plural marriages were a religious duty, and that the check to them was applied, not by their church authorities, but by an outside government, hostility to which had long been inculcated in them.

It must be remembered that it is a part of the doctrine of polygamy that woman can enter heaven only as sealed to some devout member of the Mormon church "for time and eternity," and that the space around the earth is filled with spirits seeking some "tabernacles of clay" by means of which they may attain salvation. Through the teaching of this doctrine, which is accepted as explicitly by the membership of the Mormon church at large as is any doctrine by a Protestant denomination, the Mormon women believe that the salvation of their sex depends on "sealed" marriages, and that the more children they can bring into the world the more spirits they assist on the road to salvation. In the earlier days of the church, as Brigham Young himself testified, the bringing in of new wives into a family produced discord and heartburnings, and many pictures have been drawn of the agony endured by a wife number one when her husband became a polygamist. All the testimony I can obtain in regard to the Mormonism of today shows that the Mormon women are now the most earnest advocates of polygamous marriages. Said one competent observer in Salt Lake City to me, "As the women of the South, during the war, were the rankest rebels, so the women of Mormondom are to-day the most zealous advocates of polygamy."

By precisely what steps the church may remove the existing prohibition of polygamous marriages I shall not attempt to decide. It is easy, however, to state the one enactment which would prevent the success of any such effort. This would be the adoption by Congress and ratification by the necessary number of states of a constitutional amendment making the practice of polygamy an offence under the federal law, and giving the federal courts jurisdiction to punish any violators of this law. The Mormon church recognizes this fact, and whenever such an amendment comes before Congress all its energies will be directed to prevent its ratification. Governor Wells's warning in his message vetoing the Utah Act of March, 1901, concerning prosecutions for adultery, that its enactment would be the signal for a general demand for the passage of a constitutional amendment against polygamy, showed how far the executive thought it necessary to go to prevent even the possibility of such an amendment. One of the main reasons why the Mormons are so constantly increasing their numbers in the neighboring states is that they may secure the vote of those states against an anti-polygamy amendment. Whenever such an amendment is introduced at Washington it will be found that every Mormon influence—political, mercantile, and railroad—will be arrayed against it, and its passage is unlikely unless the church shall make some misstep which will again direct public attention to it in a hostile manner.

The devout Mormon has no more doubt that his church will dominate this nation eventually than he has in the divine character of his prophet's revelations. Absurd as such a claim appears to all non-Mormon citizens, in these days when Mormonism has succeeded in turning public attention away from the sect, it is interesting to trace the church view of this matter, along with the impression which the Mormon power has made on some of its close observers. The early leaders made no concealment of their claim that Mormonism was to be a world religion. "What the world calls 'Mormonism' will rule every nation," said Orson Hyde. "God has decreed it, and his own right arm will accomplish it."* Brigham Young, in a sermon in the Tabernacle on February 15, 1856, told his people that their expulsion from Missouri was revealed to him in advance, as well as the course of their migrations, and he added: "Mark my words. Write them down. This people as a church and kingdom will go from the west to the east."

* Journal of Discourses, Vol. VII, pp. 48-53.

Tullidge, whose works, it must be remembered, were submitted to church revision, in his "Life of Brigham Young" thus defines the Mormon view of the political mission of the head of the church: "He is simply an apostle of a republican nationality, manifold in its genius; or, in popular words, he is the chief apostle of state rights by divine appointment. He has the mission, he affirms, and has been endowed with inspiration to preach the gospel of a true democracy to the nation, as well as the gospel for the remission of sins, and he believes the United States will ultimately need his ministration in both respects . . . . They form not, therefore, a rival power as against the Union, but an apostolic ministry to it, and their political gospel is state rights and self-government. This is political Mormonism in a nutshell."*

* p. 244.

Tullidge further says in his "History of Salt Lake City" (writing in 1886): "The Mormons from the first have existed as a society, not as a sect. They have combined the two elements of organization—the social and the religious. They are now a new society power in the world, and an entirety in themselves. They are indeed the only religious community in Christendom of modern birth."*

* p. 387.

Some of the closest observers of the Mormons in their earlier days took them very seriously. Thus Josiah Quincy, after visiting Joseph Smith at Nauvoo, wrote that it was "by no means impossible" that the answer to the question, "What historical American of the nineteenth century has exerted the most powerful influence upon the destiny of his countrymen," would not be, "Joseph Smith." Governor Ford of Illinois, who had to do officially with the Mormons during most of their stay in that state, afterward wrote concerning them: "The Christian world, which has hitherto regarded Mormonism with silent contempt, unhappily may yet have cause to fear its rapid increase. Modern society is full of material for such a religion . . . . It is to be feared that, in the course of a century, some gifted man like Paul, some splendid orator who will be able by his eloquence to attract crowds of the thousands who are ever ready to hear and be

carried away by the sounding brass and tinkling cymbal of sparkling oratory, may command a hearing, may succeed in breathing a new life into this modern Mohammedanism, and make the name of the martyred Joseph ring as loud, and stir the souls of men as much, as the mighty name of Christ itself."*

* Ford, "History of Illinois," p. 359.

The close observers of Mormonism in Utah, who recognize its aims, but think that its days of greatest power are over, found this opinion on the fact that the church makes practically no converts among the neighboring Gentiles; and that the increasing mining and other business interests are gradually attracting a population of non-Mormons which the church can no longer offset by converts brought in from the East and from foreign lands. Special stress is laid on the future restriction on Mormon immigration that will be found in the lack of further government land which may be offered to immigrants, and in the discouraging stories sent home by immigrants who have been induced to move to Utah by the false representations of the missionaries. Unquestionably, if the Mormon church remains stationary as regards wealth and membership, it will be overshadowed by its surroundings. What it depends on to maintain its present status and to increase its power is the loyal devotion of the body of its adherents, and its skill in increasing their number in the states which now surround Utah, and eventually in other states.

THE END