Pages

Showing posts with label Laws Against Polygamy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Laws Against Polygamy. Show all posts

Saturday, October 30, 2010

Laws Against Polygamy - 1890 (The Manifesto) +

While the manifesto from 1890 isn't a law enacted by the Congress of the United States or any other representative legislative body, it is a current law/rule of the Church, and as such I want to include it in this historical review of laws. I will take the same approach with this post as I did with the others: History first, and then the law/rule. This post will include more commentary from contemporary writers about specific events during this time period than in the other posts I have.  The reasoning behind this is to attempt to paint a picture of the time period and trials experienced by the Mormons during this time as clearly as possible.  The history of this post will cover from 1887 to 1893 (briefly into 1896).  It took until 1893 when all previously seized personal property was finally returned (3 years after the manifesto was released).  I will again break the content down by years.

I have decided not to cover (in any detail that would give proper light to the subject) the admission of the Territory of Utah as a State.  The political battle that ensued because of this will be the subject of another post (if I post it at all), and would require much more depth than I'm willing to put into this post.  As such, this significant event, and the events that led up to it, will only be touched upon lightly.

There is a great deal of history that I am leaving out, and yet, this post is still significantly large in my opinion.  For each year I give a brief summary, as written in Church Chronology, a list of events I found important during the year, and then some description of the history of the year.  I have tried to present the facts here without regard to bias.  Both positive and negative events are listed so as to show different points of view.

As with all of my posts, I hope there are minimal to no errors.  However, I'm not naive enough to believe that this is error-free.  If I find problems, I'll correct them.  I will say this:  This post feels like I've just written a book on the subject.  I've done a fair amount of research, and left out tons of material that could rightly be justified for inclusion (background, stories, explanation, quotation from laws or court cases, etc.); I just couldn't bring myself to put it all in.

Other posts in this series:

Bibliography of sources used in this post:
cc = Church Chronology, A Record of Important Events, Compiled by Andrew Jenson, 1914.
ch = Church History in the Fulness of Times - Student Manual, published by the LDS Church, 2nd Edition, 2003.
en = Ensign to the Nations, A History of the LDS Church from 1846 to 1972, by Russell R. Rich, 14th printing, 1989.
ph = Popular History of Utah, by Orson F. Whitney, 1916.
up = Under the Prophet in Utah, by Frank J. Cannon, 1911.
ww = Wilford Woodruff, by Matthias F. Cowley, 1909.




=== 1887 ===

During this year nearly 200 of the brethren were imprisoned in the Utah Penitentiary, besides a number in Idaho, for infractions of the provisions of the anti-polygamy laws. The settlements of the Saints in Mexico and Canada were greatly strengthened by "Mormon" exiles from the United States. Under the provisions of the Edmunds-Tucker law the government, through its receiver took possession of the Church offices, and a wholesale confiscation of Church property was threatened. President John Taylor died in exile, and the Council of the Twelve Apostles was sustained as the Presidency of the Church. (cc, pg. 142)

327 convictions under the Edmunds-Tucker Act this year. (en, pg. 383).

March 3, 1887 - Edmunds-Tucker Act becomes a law.
May 24, 1887 - Manti Temple "ransacked" by US Marshals looking for polygamists - no arrests were made.
July 25, 1887 - President John Taylor dies.
July 30, 1887 - Utah Supreme Court case against the Church and the PEFC according to provisions in the Edmunds-Tucker Law.
October 17, 1887 - Utah Supreme Court arguments begin in U.S. v. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
November 7, 1887 - Marshal Frank H. Dyer is appointed the Receiver, and ordered to take charge of Church property.
November 8, 1887 - Receiver Dyer is given "extraordinary powers" in handling Church property. Asked to file a $250,000 bond.
November 11, 1887 - Receiver Dyer takes possession of the Tithing Office in Salt Lake City, but does not interfere with the regular business.
November 15, 1887 - Receiver Dyer takes possession of the Historian's Office and the Gardo House. The Tithing Office and the Historian's Office are leased back to the Church. The marshal demands the President's Office be delivered to him.
November 17, 1887 - Marshal Dyer files a $50,000 bond in the suit against the Perpetual Emigration Fund Company (PEFC).
November 18, 1887 - Receiver Dyer takes possession of the PEFC property.
November 23, 1887 - Receiver Dyer takes formal possession of the President's Office, leaving two deputies in charge.
December 12, 1887 - Rudger Clawson released from prison - pardoned by President Cleveland.
December 31, 1887 - Because of the persecution and legal proceedings against the Church, all the workmen on the Temple Block in Salt Lake City, are discharged, and work on the temple is suspended.


Judicial/Political effect:
"In Idaho the crusade had been carried on vindictively.  Those who engineered the 'Anti-Mormon' movement in that Territory boasted that their juries would convict 'Mormons' whether innocent or guilty.  The U.S. Marshal, who afterwards became Delegate in Congress and subsequently a United States Senator affirmed that he had 'a jury that would convict Jesus Christ;' and no one disputed, or had any reason to dispute, the profane declaration."  (ph, pg. 454).

"By Act of Congress, all the church property in excess of $50,000 had been seized by the United States marshal, and the community faced the total loss of its common fund.  Because of some evasions that had been attempted by the Church authorities - and the suspicion of more such - the marshal had taken everything that he could in any way assume to belong to the Church."  (up, pg. 26).
"The Edmunds-Tucker Act of 1887 included provisions aimed at destroying the Church as a political and economic entity. The law officially dissolved the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints as a legal corporation and required the Church to forfeit to the government all property in excess of fifty thousand dollars. Government officials set out immediately to confiscate Church holdings. For example, the buildings on Temple Square and other Church offices were placed in receivership and then rented back to the Church. In an attempt to stop the flow of European converts, the government dissolved the Perpetual Emigration Fund Company, the chief agency for immigration." (ch, pg. 437).
"B.H. Roberts claims that the real cause of the anti-Mormon crusade was a fight for the political control of Utah on the part of the crusaders.  They not only wanted control of the offices in Utah that federal officers could give them, but control of the legislature and the treasury of Utah as well.  Even with the Utah Commission in political control and with the other aspects of the Edmunds Law as weapons, the Ring was not satisfied with the general progress made against the Saints, as they still could not wrest political control from the Mormons."  (en, pp. 380-381).

Effect on the Mormons living polygamy:
"As the judicial crusade against polygamy continued, a new way of life was created for many Saints.  Otherwise law-abiding men escaped to the underground and frequently moved from place to place to avoid the marshals who were hunting them.  Fleeing 'cohabs' (as they were called) went into canyons, barns, fields, and cellars to avoid their pursuers.  Federal officers countered by disguising themselves as peddlers or census takers in order to gain entry into homes.  Some marshals raided houses, invading privacy and even mistreating wives and children to catch their prey.  Ten and twenty-dollar bounties were offered for every Latter-day Saint captured, and much larger amounts were available if a General Authority was apprehended." (ch, pg. 432).

"A more despairing situation than theirs, at that hour, has never been faced by an American community. Practically every Mormon man of any distinction was in prison, or had just served his term, or had escaped into exile. Hundreds of Mormon women had left their homes and their children to flee from the officers of law; many had been behind prison bars for refusing to answer the questions put to them in court; more were concealed, like outlaws, in the houses of friends. Husbands and wives, separated by the necessities of flight, had died apart, miserably. Old men were coming out of prison, broken in health. A young plural wife whom I knew - a mere girl, of good breeding, of gentle life - seeking refuge in the mountains to save her husband from a charge of 'unlawful cohabitation,' had had her infant die in her arms on the road; and she had been compelled to bury the child, wrapped in her shawl, under a rock, in a grave that she scratched in the soil with a stick. In our day! In a civilized state!" (up, pp. 25-26).



=== 1888 ===

The year, generally speaking, was a prosperous one for the Saints in Utah and surrounding territories, although more arrests and imprisonments for conscience sake than during any previous season since the prosecutions under the Edmunds law commenced. A good harvest was gathered in nearly all the settlements of the Saints, although water was somewhat scarce in many places. The missionaries abroad were quite successful in their labors, especially on the "islands of the sea," including Samoa, where the fulness of the gospel was introduced in 1888. (cc, pg. 157).

334 convictions under the Edmunds-Tucker Act for this year. (en, pg. 343).

January 18, 1888 - Utah Supreme Court denies an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court in the case of appointing a receiver for the Church property.
May 14, 1888 - Deputy marshals demand the tabernacle at Logan as Church property, but are refused.
July 6, 1888 - The Church farm in Salt Lake County is turned over to Receiver Dyer.
July 9, 1888 - Receiver Dyer petitions the Supreme Court of Utah to have $157,000+ worth of Church property delivered to him.
July 9, 1888 - President Cleveland nominates Elliot F. Sandford to replace Judge Zane.
July 10, 1888 - Considerable Church property is turned over to Dyer on compromise, pending appeal to the US Supreme Court.
August 28, 1888 - Judge Sandford arrives and relieves Judge Zane.
September 17, 1888 - George Q. Cannon surrenders to Marshal Dyer and is brought before Judge Sandford.
December 12, 1888 - Mormon legislators are expelled from the Idaho legislature.


Life on the Underground (Frank J. Cannon relating a story of meeting with his father, George Q. Cannon):
"About ten o'clock one night in the spring of 1888, I set out secretly, from Salt Lake City, on a nine-mile drive to Bountiful, to meet my father, who was concealed 'on the underground,' among friends; and that night drive, with its haste and its apprehension, was so of a piece with the times, that I can hardly separate it from them in my memory. We were all being carried along in an uncontrollable sweep of tragic events. In a sort of blindness, like the night, unable to see the nearest fork of the road ahead of us, we were being driven to a future that held we knew not what.

"... The whole district was picketed with deputy marshals; we did not know that we were not being followed; we had always the sense of evading patrols in an enemy's country. But this feeling was so old with us that it had become a thing of no regard.

"... With Wilcken holding the reins on a pair of fast horses at full speed, we whirled past an old adobe wall (which the Mormons had built to defend their city from the Indians) and came out into the purple night of Utah, with its frosty starlight and its black hills ... we drove, that night, up the Salt Lake valley, across a corner of the desert, to the little town of Bountiful; and as soon as we arrived among the houses of the settlement, a man stepped out into the road, from the shadows, and stopped us. Wilcken spoke to him. He recognized us, and let us pass. As we turned into the farm where my father was concealed, I saw men lurking here and there, on guard, about the grounds." (up, pp. 23-25, 27).

Mormon Community Definition:
"Their community was founded on the three principles of co-operation, contribution, and arbitration. By co-operation of effort they had realized that dream of the Socialists, 'equality of opportunity' - not equality of individual capacity, which the accidents of nature prevent, but an equal opportunity for each individual to develop himself to the last reach of his power. By contribution - by requiring each man to give one-tenth of his income to a common fund - they had attained the desired end of modern civilization, the abolition of poverty, and had adjusted the straps of the community burden to the strength of the individual to bear it. By arbitration, they had effected the settlement of every dispute of every kind without litigation; for their High Councils decided all sorts of personal or neighborhood disputes without expense of money to the disputants. The 'storehouse of the Lord' had been kept open to fill every need of the poor among 'God's people,' and opportunities for self-help had been created out of the common fund, so that neither unwilling idleness nor privation might mar the growth of the community or the progress of the individual.

"But Joseph Smith had gone further. ... [He assumed] that a woman's chief right was that of wifehood and maternity, [and so] instituted the practice of plural marriage, as a 'Prophet of God,' on the authority of a direct revelation from the Almighty. It was upon this rock that the whole enterprise, the whole experiment in religious communism, now threatened to split. Not that polygamy was so large an incident in the life of the community - for only a small proportion of the Mormons were living in plural marriage. And not that this practice was the cardinal sin of Mormonism - for among intelligent men, then as now, the great objection to the Church was its assumption of a divine authority to hold the 'temporal power,' to dictate in politics, to command action and to acquit of responsibility. But polygamy was the offense against civilization which the opponents of Mormonism could always cite in order to direct against the Church the concentrated antagonism of the governments of the Western world." (up, pp. 33-34).

How Chief Justice Charles S. Zane was replaced:

Frank J. Cannon was asked by his father (George Q.) to use his influence in Washington to seek relief for the Saints in Utah.  George Q:  "We feel that if relief does not soon appear, our community will be scattered and the great work crushed."  Late one night, he secretly meets with Joseph F. Smith at the Lion House in Salt Lake City.  This first quote is Frank Cannon's belief of what drives some of the animosity between Joseph F. Smith and the government of the United States.
"No Mormon in those years, I think, had more hate than [Joseph F.] Smith for the United States government; and surely none had better reasons to give himself for hate.  He had the bitter recollection of the assassination of his father and his uncle in the jail of Carthage, Illinois; he could remember the journey that he had made with his widowed mother across the Mississippi, across Iowa, across the Missouri, and across the unknown and desert West, in ox teams, half starved, unarmed, persecuted by civilization and at the mercy of savages; he could remember all the toils and hardships of pioneer days 'in the valley;' he had seen the army of '58 arrive to complete, as he believed, the final destruction of our people; he had suffered from all the proscriptive legislation of 'the raid,' been out-lawed, been in exile, been in hiding, hunted like a thief." (up, pp. 38-39).
During the conversation with President Smith, he [Frank] is asked to do whatever he can to alleviate the suffering in Utah.  Here is what Joseph F. Smith is reported to have said:
"These scoundrels here must be removed [political appointees in Utah, and those seeking to arrest men charged with polygamy] - if there's any way to do it.  They're trying to repeat the persecutions of Missouri and Illinois.  They want to despoil us of our heritage - of our families.  I'm sick of being hunted like a wild beast.  I've done no harm to them or theirs.  Why can't they leave us alone to live our religion and obey the commandments of God and build up Zion? ... I thought Cleveland would stop this damnable raid and make them leave us in peace - but he's as bad as the rest.  Can't they see that these carpet baggers are only trying to rob us?  Make them see that.  The hounds!  Sometimes it seems to me that the Lord is letting these iniquities go on so that the nation may perish in its sins all the sooner!"  (up, pp. 40-41).
Frank left and traveled east, not knowing exactly how to accomplish the task he had been given.  In Washington he "intended to argue - as the first wise concession needed of the Federal authorities - that Chief Justice Zane should no longer be retained on the bench in Utah, but should be succeeded by a man more gentle. He was the great figure among our prosecutors; the others were District Attorney Dickson and the two assistants, Mr. Varian and Mr. Hiles." (up, pg. 50).

He traveled to New York City and met with the mayor there, Mr. Abraham S. Hewitt, a friend of his father's.  After hearing of the troubles in Utah, the mayor recommended Judge Elliott F. Sanford as a replacement for Judge Charles S. Zane.  Mr. Cannon met Mr. Sandford and his wife in New York and convinced him (them) to accept a Presidential nomination to the position of Chief Justice in Utah.  He is given a letter to present to Mr. William C. Whitney (Secretary of the Navy), who subsequently helped him obtain an interview with President Grover Cleveland.
"I had to tell him [President Cleveland] that the situation had not improved, and his face flushed with an anger that he made no attempt to conceal.  He declared that the fault must lie in our obstinate determination to hold ourselves superior to the law.  He could not sympathize with our sufferings, he said, since they were self-inflicted.  He admitted that he had once been opposed to the Edmunds-Tucker bill, but felt now that it was justified by the immovability of the Mormons.  All palliatives had failed.  The patience of Congress had been exhausted.  There was no recourse, except to make statutes cutting enough to destroy the illegal practices and unlawful leadership in the Mormon community."  (up, pg. 74).
Just as the President was dismissing him, he told him that 20 years of politicians doing the same thing over and over again has failed.  He, Frank, has a solution that could possibly work. 
"Mr. President," I replied, "if you were travelling in the West, and came to an unbridged stream with your wagon train, and saw tracks leading down into the water where you thought there was a ford, you would naturally expect to cross there, assuming that others had done so before you.  But suppose that some man on the bank should say to you:  'I've watched wagon trains go in here for more than twenty years, and I've never yet seen one come out on the other side.  Look over at that opposite bank.  You see there are no wagon tracks there.  Now, down the river a piece, is a place where I think there's a ford.  I've never got anybody to try it yet, but certainly it's as good a chance as this one!'  Mr. President, what would you do?  Would you attempt a crossing where there had been twenty years of failure, or would you try the other place - on the chance that it might take you over?"  (up, pp. 76-77).
In other words, all of the political efforts to solve the Mormon problem have been the same for the last 20 years, and they have all failed.  Something new must be tried.  When Mr. Cannon met the Presdient a few days later, "He was interested, receptive, almost genial.  He gave me an oppotunity to cover the whole ground of my case, and I went over it step by step."
"He looked squarely at me, with a most determined front, when I told him that the Mormons would be ground to powder before they would yield.  'They can't yield,' I warned him.  'They're like the passengers on a train going with a mad speed down a dangerous grade.  For any of them to attempt to jump is simple destruction.  They can only pray to Providence to help them.  But if that train were to be brought to a stop at some station where they could alight with anything like self-respect, there would be many of them glad to get off - even though the train had not arrived at it's 'revealed' destination."  (up, pg. 79).
After many more meetings, the President decided that he wanted to help address the Mormon problem.  He was going to appoint Mr. Elliott F. Sandford as Chief Justice in Utah, relieving Judge Charles Zane.


Reaction to Judge Sandford's installation:
"He was appointed Chief Justice on the 9th day of July, 1888, and - as the Mormon people expressed it - 'the backbone of the raid was broken.' On August 26, 1888, he arrived in Salt Lake City. On September 17, my father [George Q. Cannon] came before him in court and pleaded guilty to two indictments charging him with 'unlawful cohabitation.' He was fined $450 [~$10,500 today] and sentenced to the penitentiary for one hundred and seventy-five days. His example was followed by a number of prominent Mormons, including Francis Marion Lyman. ... It is true that not many cases, relatively speaking, came to Justice Sandford; but the leader whom the authorities were most eager to subjugate under Federal power was judged and sentenced; and the effect, both on the country and on the Mormon people, was all that we had expected."  (up, pp. 80-81).
"While the crusade was by no means at an end, its extreme bitterness was gradually vanishing. During the year Judge Zane was succeeded by Judge Elliott Sandford of New York. Mr. Sanford was a man of refinement and of moral courage. He manifested no personal bias and no excessive zeal in the administration of the law." (ww, pg. 563).
 


=== 1889 ===

By the Saints in Utah 1889 will be remembered as the year when the question whether or not the Church to which they belonged could be robbed of its property by the government was laid before the supreme tribunal of their country; and also the question whether they could be robbed of civil and political rights as individual citizens, because of their religious belief. Abroad the missionaries met with considerable success, and a few were baptized in Asia Minor and Palestine. In New Zealand large numbers of natives embraced the gospel, and the progress in Europe is shown by the fact that, during the year, 321 were baptized in Great Britain, 572 in Scandinavia, 219 in Switzerland and Germany, and 77 in Holland. The Book of Mormon was translated into the modern Jewish and Maori languages. In Salt Lake City, Ogden, and other places in Utah the political developments toward the close of the year will always be remembered as being very significant and demonstrative. (cc, pg. 169).

346 convictions under the Edmunds-Tucker Act during this year. (en, pg. 383).

January 14, 1889 - Francis M. Lyman sentenced to the Utah Penitentiary for 85 days and fined $200.
January 19, 1889 - U.S. Supreme Court arguments heard in U.S. v. Mormon Church.
February 18, 1889 - Receiver Dyer is examined in court, and nothing is found against him (his work).
March 9, 1889 - Marshal Dyer tendered his resignation to President Cleveland.
May 24, 1889 - Judge Charles S. Zane is reappointed Chief Judge of Utah by President Harrison.
June 3, 1889 - Judge Zane replaces Judge Sandford.
June 24, 1889 - Utah Supreme Court ordered that the Church farm be leased to John R. Winder for $401/month.
July 12, 1889 - President Harrison appoints Elias H. Parsons as marshal and Charles S. Varian district attorney for Utah.
August 21, 1889 - Receiver Dyer leased 29,756 Church sheep at an average of 43 cents/head.
September 27, 1889 - Utah Commission reports to Secretary John W. Noble - they say Utah needs harsher measures.
November, 1889 - The Endowment House is taken down (erected in 1855).
November 30, 1889 - Judge Anderson, in the Third District Court, renders a decision that "Mormon" aliens can not be admitted to citizenship (in the U.S.).


Replacement of Judge Sandford by Judge Zane:
President Benjamin Harrison was elected, and as a consequence many public government officials were replaced in Utah.  "An official change that caused more comment than all the others combined was the removal of Chief Justice Sandford and the reappointment of his predecessor, Chief Justice Zane. ... Justice Sandford had written out his resignation soon after Harrison was inaugurated."  Justice Sandford requested to know why he was being replaced, and the response was the following:  "... the President has become satisfied that your administration of the office is not in harmony with the policy he deems proper to be pursued with reference to Utah affairs."

Judge Sandford made the following rejoinder:  "My earnest purpose while on the Bench, as Chief Justice of this Territory, has been to administer justice and the laws honestly and impartially to all men, under the obligations of my oath of office.  If the President of the United States has any policy which he desires a Judge of the Supreme Court to carry out in reference to Utah affairs other than the one I have pursued, you may say to him that he has done well to remove me." (ph, pg. 470).

Judge Anderson's decision regarding naturalization:
"Many bona fide residents had not been naturalized, and to pass upon applications for citizenship Associate Justice Anderson held special sessions of court at Salt Lake City.  'Mormon' applicants were questioned as to their belief in polygamy, and if they admitted such a belief they were objected to as 'men of immoral character.'  Inquiries made of other applicants concerning sexual practices outside the marriage relation, were characterized by the objectors 'superfluous and absurd.'

"Allegations respecting a ceremony which was said to require from everyone passing through the Endowment House an oath of hostility to the United States Government, were made the basis of a contention that no member of the 'Mormon' Church should be admitted to citizenship.'
...
"Judge Anderson, in a decision rendered on the last day of November, 1889, denied the applications of John Moore and Walter J. Edgar for citizenship, on the ground that they had been through the Endowment House and had there taken an oath of hostility to the Government.  Nine others were rejected because they were members of the 'Mormon' Church, though they had never been through the Endowment House, and were not even accused of taking any disloyal oath or obligation."  (ph, pp. 478-479).


In concluding his journal for the year 1889, Wilford Woodruff wrote: 
'This ends the year.  The word of the Prophet, Joseph Smith, has been fulfilled wherein he declared that the whole nation would turn against Zion and make war upon the Saints.  The nation has never been so full of lies against the Saints as it is today."  (ww, pg. 566).



=== 1890 ===

Salt Lake City passed from the hands of the People's Party to those of the Liberals, or anti Mormon element. Nearly all the civil rights left to the Saints were threatened by proposed anti-Mormon legislation. President Woodruff issued his manifesto, suspending plural marriage. (cc, pg. 180).


February 3, 1890 - The Supreme Court of the United States rendered an opinion affirming the constitutionality of the Idaho test oath, in the case of Samuel D. Davis.
March 4, 1890 - Utah Supreme Court made an order terminating the lease of the Gardo House and hereafter renting it to the highest bidder.
March 5, 1890 - Utah Supreme Court made an order terminating the lease of the Tithing Office grounds and was rented to the highest bidder.
March 10, 1890 - John R. Winder is the highest bidder for the Gardo House $450/month.
March 12, 1890 - John R. Winder is the highest bidder for the Tithing Office grounds $500/month.
April 11, 1890 - Cullom-Struble Bill introduced in Congress.
May 14, 1890 - George F. Edmunds introduces a bill in the Senate providing for the entire disfranchisement of the Mormons.
May 19, 1890 - United States v. Mormon Church - Supreme Court says Edmunds-Tucker act is constitutional.
June 10, 1890 - George F. Edmunds introduces a bill in the Senate providing for the disposition of the escheated Church property.
July 7, 1890 - Receiver Dyer made a report on Church property for Examiner Rosburough.
July 14, 1890 - Receiver Dyer resignes his position as Receiver of confiscated Church property.
July 16, 1890 - Utah Supreme Court appoints Henry W. Lawrence as Receiver of confiscated Church property.
July 29, 1890 - Receiver Henry W. Lawrence is ordered by the Utah Supreme Court to sell the Church sheep in his possession.
September 24, 1890 - A manifesto was issued, signed by President Woodruff, in which the Saints are advised "to refrain from contracting any marriage forbidden by the laws of the land."
September 26, 1890 - The Manifesto is released.
October 6, 1890 - The Manifesto is sustained by the Church in Conference assembled.
October 7, 1890 - In the Third District Court, Judge Zane rules that membership in the Mormon Church should no longer be a barrier to aliens being admitted to citizenship.
October 13, 1890 - James E. Clark is sentenced by Judge Zane to pay a $100 fine for unlawful cohabitation. In consideration of the manifesto just issued, no imprisonment is imposed.
November 5, 1890 - U.S. District Attorney Varian filed two suits for the forfeiture of the Temple Block under the escheat law, in the Third District court.


Background information:
"Although arrests and imprisonments caused families to suffer, the greatest problem for the Church was its inability to acquire and hold the funds necessary to build temples, do missionary work, publish material, and provide for the welfare of the Saints.  Church leaders succeeded in getting their case before the United States Supreme Court, arguing that the confiscation of Church property under the Edmunds-Tucker Act was unconstitutional.  But in May 1890, the court upheld, in a five to four decision, the constitutionality of all the government had done under the Edmunds-Tucker Law.  Though disappointed by the decision, there was little the Saints could do to ward off the impending economic destruction of the Church."  (ch, pg. 438).

"With nearly 1,300 men and women having been sentenced, with all Latter-day Saints in Idaho having been disfranchised; with the Church having been disincorporated and her real and personal property confiscated; with all polygynists and all women in Utah having been disfranchised; with all the rights of local self-government in Utah suspended (even to the privilege of operating their schools); with pressure arising for the government to disfranchise all Mormons in territories; with prospects for the future that the personal property of every Latter-day Saint might be confiscated; with the United States Supreme Court having declared the Anti-Bigamy Law of 1862, the Idaho Test Oath, and the main parts of the Edmunds-Tucker Law as constitutional, President Woodruff felt the time had come when it could be said that the members of the Church had gone forth with all diligence to perform the commands of the Lord, and the Lord would no longer require them to practice plural marriage."  (en, pp. 385-386).

February 3, 1890 - Supreme Court case:  Davis v. Beason:  133 U.S. 333

Short answer:  The test oath used to qualify voters in Idaho is legal, and cannot be challenged.  Samuel D. Davis' prison term is legal.

Here is a piece of the oath used in Idaho:
"... and I do further swear that I am not a bigamist or polygamist; that I am not a member of any order, organization or association which teaches, advises, counsels or encourages its members, devotees or any other person to commit the crime of bigamy or polygamy, or any other crime defined by law, as a duty arising or resulting from membership in such order, organization or association, or which practices bigamy, polygamy or plural or celestial marriage as a doctrinal rite of such organization; that I do not and will not, publicly or privately or in any manner whatever teach, advise, counsel or encourage any person to commit the crime of bigamy or polygamy, or any other crime defined by law, either as a religious duty or otherwise."
If you are a polygamist, or belong to an organization that encourages polygamy, whether or not you actually practice it, you are disqualified from voting.  This effectively disfrachised all Mormons in Idaho.

The jurisdiction of the case was all that the Supreme Court decided on; did the Idaho court have jurisdiction in the case?  Using Reynolds v. United States as it's first case reference, the court demonstrated that polygamy was a crime that could be legislated against, and it would not intefere with a citizen's first amendment rights of freedom of religion.  With that case as the foundation, they further found that "the territorial legislature [of Idaho] was authorized to prescribe any qualifications for voters calculated to secure obedience to its laws."  In other words, the Idaho court had jurisdiction to convict and sentence Mr. Samuel Davis in connection with this test oath.

"The judgment of the court below is therefore Affirmed."

This case had broad reaching effects for the Mormons in Utah.  To over-simplify it a bit, it meant that a law could be passed disqualifying all Mormons from voting.  The very real possibility of a new law aimed at Mormons in Utah, and not just Idaho, was shortly seen; two months later, bills to affect this outcome were introduced in the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States - the Cullom-Struble Bill.



Cullom-Struble Bill:

Members of the Church in both Utah and Idaho watched this case closely, and were very disappointed with the outcome.  They had hoped the Supreme Court would strike down the test oath in Idaho, and allow all law abiding citizens to vote - independent of their religion.  However, with the affirmation from the United States Supreme Court that the "Idaho Test Oath" was constitutional, and the continuing troubles of persuading the Mormons in Utah to give up the practice of polygamy, Washington felt that stricter legislation was necessary to force the Utah Church to become law abiding - even to the point of removing individual rights of citizens; the right to vote.

April 10, 1890:  Illinois Senator Shelby Moore Cullom introduces a bill aimed at disfranchising all who practice polygamy in every Territory of the United States.
April 11, 1890:  Iowa Representative Isaac S. Struble introduces a bill aimed at disfranchising all who practice polygamy in every Territory of the United States.

Both of these bill are combined, and called the Cullom-Struble bill.
"It provided that no person living in plural marriage, or who taught polygamy, or was a member or contributed to the support of any organization that advised or encouraged the practice, or who assisted in the solemnization of plural marriages, should vote, serve as a juror, or hold office in Utah."  (ph, pg. 482).
"In a press interview, the Governor [Thomas] stated that the decision of the Court of Last Resort in the Idaho disfranchisement case had been accepted by leading members of Congress as the solution of the Utah problem, and he expressed the opinion that the Cullom-Struble bill would probably become a law."  (ph, pg. 483).
The Deseret News ran an editorial by Charles W. Penrose giving their position (probably to be considered the Church's position as well, although it wasn't official as it was editorial) on April 12, 1890.  A link to this editorial can be found here.  From the start of the editorial, Mr. Penrose is decidedly against this new legislation, which he calls the "[R. N.] Baskin anti-'Mormon' bill introduced in the Senate by Senator Cullom."
"It includes the extremest features of the Idaho test oath, besides going still further than that oppressive and unjust measure.

"Among the alleged features of the organization, membership in and support of which produces political disfranchisement, is that it 'teaches or advises that any such law as aforesaid is not supreme, or that any alleged revelation on the subject of such marriage is paramount to any such law."
Mr. Penrose states that Latter-Day Saints are among the most loyal of citizens in the country and believe that the Constitution of the United States is an inspired document.  He goes on to state that the Saints "will yet take part in the reorganization of this country upon the basic principles of the national organic law."


This bill "would not only apply the Idaho Test Oath to Utah but would also disfranchise all Latter-day Saints in all of the territories.  This literally meant that no member of the Church in Utah or any other territory could be a citizen.  Thus, even where the Saints were in the great majority, they would have absolutely nothing to say about their government." (en, pg. 384).

George Q. Cannon asks his son Frank to talk with his friend, Secretary of State James G. Blaine, to try and stop the passage of this bill.  Frank arranged the meeting and recorded these notes about his conversation with Secretary Blaine:
"He rose to terminate the interview.  He looked at me with a smile.  'The Lord giveth,' he said, 'and the Lord taketh away.'  Wouldn't it be possible for your people to find some way - without disobedience to the commands of God - to bring yourselves into harmony with the law and institutions of this country?  Believe me, it's not possible for any people as weak in numbers as yours, to set themselves up as superior to the majesty of a nation like this.  We may succeed, this time, in preventing your disfranchisement; but nothing permanent can be done until you 'get into line.' ... He put his arm around my shoulders, at last, and said:  'You tell your father for me - as I tell you, young man - you shall not be harmed, this time.'"  (up, pg. 90).
"The Cullom-Struble Bill was not rushed through Congress as the Edmunds Bill had been; a fact owing, it is said, to the silent though potent influence of Secretary Blaine.  The great political leader was convinced of the impolicy of the proposed legislation ... His powerful hand was interposed, however, with the understanding that something would be done in Utah to meet the situation."  (ph, pp. 485-486).
More information on the background of the bill, and Frank Cannon's involvement with stopping it can be found here.  This is actually a very good read on background for the entire Manifesto, pressures on the Church to change, and what went on behind the scenes politically.

After returning from Washington, Frank J. Cannon met with President Woodruff to tell him what happened there and the expectations of certain politicians for a change in Church doctrine.  The substance of the meeting is that he has learned from Washington that the Cullom-Struble bill will not pass; however, the Church must abandon polygamy entirely, or the next bill will pass.
WW: "Brother Frank, I have been making it a matter of prayer. I have wrestled mightily with the Lord. And I think I see some light."

FJC: "To be very plain with you, President Woodruff, our friends expect, and the country will insist, that the Church shall yield the practice of plural marriage."

WW: "I had hoped we wouldn't have to meet this trouble this way. You know what it means to our people. I had hoped that the Lord might open the minds of the people of this nation to the truth, so that they might be converted to the everlasting covenant. Our prophets have suffered like those of old, and I thought that the persecutions of Zion were enough - that they would bring some other reward that this."

"In polygamy, the men and women alike had been compelled to suffer on its account by the grim trials of the life itself and by the hatred of all civilization arrayed against it. They had grown to value their marriage system by what it had cost them. They had been driven by the contempt of the world to argue for its sanctity, to live up to their declarations, and to raise it in their esteem to what it professed to be, the celestial order that prevailed in the Heavens! I knew, as well as President Woodruff did, the wrench it would give their hearts to have to abandon, at last, what they had so long suffered for." (up, pp. 98-99).



May 19, 1890 - Supreme Court case:  Mormon Church v. United States:  136 US 1

Short answer:  Congress can dissolve the corporation of the Church, and seize specific personal and real property; therefore, the Edmunds-Tucker Act is constitutional.

The main questions of the hearing are answered here in the report on the case:
"(3) Congress had the power to repeal the act of incorporation of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints not only by virtue of its general power over the territories, but by virtue of an express reservation in the organic act of the Territory of Utah of the power to disapprove and annul the acts of its legislature."

"(4) The act of incorporation being repealed and the corporation dissolved, its property, in the absence of any other lawful owner, devolved to the United States, subject to be disposed of according to the principles applicable to property devoted to religious and charitable uses."
After the passage of the Edmunds-Tucker Act in 1887, the Church tried to transfer a great deal of property to individual trustees in an attempt to avoid being classified as "Church property" and thus seizable by the Receiver; this was struck down:
"The attempt made, after the passage of the act on February 19, 1887, and while it was in the president's hands for his approval or rejection, to transfer the property from the trustee then holding it to other persons, and for the benefit of different associations, was so evidently intended as an evasion of the law that the court below justly regarded it as void and without force or effect."
Ruling:  "We have carefully examined the decree, and do not find anything in it that calls for a reversal. It may perhaps require modification in some matters of detail, and for that purpose only the case is reserved for further consideration."

To say the final decision was a disappointment to the Church, would be a large understatement.  This ruling meant that the United States government could seize any property of the Mormon Church it deemed necessary in order to force the Church into obedience.  It appeared the government was going to grind the Saints to powder, and there was nothing that could be done to stop it.
A listing of the main properties seized by the Receiver can be found on this post here (see item #11, part 5).


The Issuance of the Manifesto:
"But the courts had decided 'against us.' The great men of the nation were determined to show us no mercy. Legislation was impending that would put us 'in the power of the wicked.' Brother George Q. Cannon, Brother John T. Caine, and the other brethren who had been in Washington, had found that the situation of the Church was critical. Brother Franklin S. Richards had advised him that our last legal defense had fallen. 'In broken and contrite spirit' he had sought the will of the Lord, and the Holy Spirit had revealed to him that it was necessary for the Church to relinquish the practice of that principle for which the brethren had been willing to lay down their lives." (up, pp. 104-105).

Frank Cannon was requested to meet with President Woodruff.
"I hastened to Salt Lake City, to the offices of the Presidency. President Woodruff took me into a private room and read his 'manifesto.'

"Here, shaking in the hand of age, was a sheet of paper by which the future of a half million people was to be directed; and that simple old man was to speak through it, to them, with the awful authority of the voice of God.

"He told me he had written it himself, and it certainly appeared to me to be in his hand-writing. ...  I found it disappointingly mild. It denied that the Church had been solemnizing any plural marriages of late, and advised the faithful 'to refrain from contracting any marriages forbidden by the law of the land.' In spite of this mildness, President Woodruff asked me whether I thought the Mormons would support the revelation - whether they would accept it.

"I replied that there could be no proper anxiety on that point. The majority of the Mormon people were ready for such a message." (up, pp. 99-100).

Frank is then invited to attend a meeing in the President's offices, where the rest of the available apostles from the quorum, learned of the manifesto of President Woodruff.  There is far too much to quote to do justice to this piece of history.  I suggest a reading of the 4th chapter of Frank's book (link:  here) to better understand this.  The first reactions and final acceptance by these men was good reading.  Joseph F. Smith appeared to have a very hard time with this initially.  I know of no other publicly available source (correct me if I'm wrong please) that conveys this story of when the Manifesto was first acknowledged.  After the amount of time I've spent reading history, my opinion is that this story would appear to be a faithful account of the meeting.


The Manifesto is read in the October General Conference:

The Church had published the Manifesto to the world.  It had been given to newspapers across the country and relayed to Washington D.C. so as to satisfy those in power that the Mormons had given up polygamy as a religious practice.  The publishing of this document wasn't enough.  Washington wanted the document read and voted on in Conference in a public manner.
"The Articles of Faith were sustained as the rule of conduct for the Church, a motion to that end having been made by Elder Franklin D. Richards, of the Council of the Twelve.  The Manifesto was then read to the people in like manner, and another of the Apostles - Elder Lorenzo Snow - supplemented the reading with this motion:  'I move that, recognizing Wilford Woodruff as the 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 which has been read in our hearing, and which is dated September 25, 1890, and that as a Church in General Conference assembled, we accept his declaration concerning plural marriages as authoritative and binding .'  The vote to sustain the motion was unanimous."  (ph, pg. 487).
"In his private journal he made no particular mention of the circumstances leading up to the Manifesto, neither did he make any comment upon it further than to say: 'I have been called upon this day to act for the Church.'

"It was a solemn day to all Israel. The thought of suspending the practice of a principle for which they had already suffered so much, was indeed painful to thousands of the people. The responsibility, however, the Prophet of God placed upon the nation for rejecting a principle which had within it the power to redeem the world from the greatest of social evils and according to Isaiah, to take away the reproach of women who have been unjustly dealt with by ungodly men." (ww, pg. 570).

Affect of the Manifesto:
"The effect of the 'Mormon' President's official utterance upon those most favorable to the disfranchisement legislation was quite dispiriting.  It came as a surprise - almost as a shock to them.  They at once questioned the sincerity of the declaration, denouncing it as a sham, a trick to deceive the Nation and gain a temporary advantage. ... One of the first to recognize it as genuine, and allow it to influence his official course, was Chief Justice Zane.  He had repeatedly expressed the wish that the President of the Church would issue such a statement, and now that it had come, he was glad, and received it in good faith.  The day after its ratification by the Conference, Judge Zane, while examining in court certain applicants for citizenship, remarked:  'Hereafter I will not make the simple fact that an applicant is a member of the 'Mormon' Church a bar to his admission.'"  (ph, pg. 489).

"In any discussion of the public affairs that make the subject matter of this narrative, a line of discrimination must be drawn at the year 1890.  In that year the Church began a progressive course of submission to the civil law, and the nation received each act of surrender with forgiveness.  The previous defiances of the Mormon people ceased to give grounds for a complaint against them.  The old harshnesses of the Federal government were canceled by the new generosity of a placated nation.  And neither party to the present strife in Utah should go back, beyond the period of this composition, to dig up, from the past, its buried wrongs."  (up, pg. 112).
"Within the space of a few days a revolution was completed that had been sought by the power of our nation and of the civilized world, for a generation, with stripes and imprisonment, death, confiscation and the ostracism of the country's public contempt.  It had been obtained, I knew, chiefly by the sagacity of the First Councilor using the pressure of circumstances to enforce the persuasions of diplomacy."  (up, pg. 114).




=== 1891 ===

The People's Party in Utah was dissolved and most of its members united with the two great nation parties - Democrats and Republicans. Under the Liberal rule Salt Lake City became a regular rendezvous for foot pads, burglars, and thieves. Immorality, wickedness and lawlessness had full sway; taxation was made oppressive and unjust. (cc, pg. 190).

February 13, 1891 - The former residence of George Q. Cannon on South Temple Street, and other valuable property in Salt Lake City, were seized by the US Marshal, under the pretense that it was escheated Church property.
May 25, 1891 - US Supreme Court rendered a decision that the escheated Church property should still remain in the hands of the Receiver, and the Utah Supreme Court should take further action in the case.
June, 1891 - The People's Party (Church Party) dissolved.
July 1, 1891 - Utah Supreme Court appointed Judge Charles F. Loofbourow to take testimony in the Church suits as a Master of Chancery.
September 27, 1891 - Joseph F. Smith addresses a congregation in the tabernacle - his first public appearance in years.
October 19, 1891 - Judge Loofbourow began taking testimony in the escheated Church property cases, with a view to deciding what charitable uses the escheated Church property should be applied to. Presidents Wilford Woodruff and George Q. Cannon testified.
October 27, 1891 - Judge Zane decided that the Whitney property of the Tithing Office block, the Cannon House on South Temple street, the Council House Corner, SLC, were exempt from confiscation, as well as the Tabernacle Square and other property at Ogden.
November 11, 1891 - After a lengthy investigation in the 3rd district court, Judge Zane rendered a decree escheating the Tithing Office, Gardo House, Historian's Office, and Church farm to the government.
December 1, 1891 - The Gardo House was vacated by the Church as escheated property.
December 19, 1891 - Petition for Amnesty signed by prominent men of the Church (leaders) and endorsed by Governor Thomas, Chief Justice Zane, and other 'gentiles.'


Background Information:

"A Sentiment for Tolerance: Cases of unlawful cohabitation continued to be prosecuted as fast as they came to the knowledge of the Government officers. But gradually a sentiment grew - and it was shared by all classes of the community - that men who had married polygamously before the date of the Manifesto, should not be interfered with for living with their plural families while caring for and supporting them. No more polygamous marriages were to be entered into, but time was to be given for plural relationships already existing to pass away by natural processes, and men involved in such relations were not to be compelled to desert their wives and children and cast them adrift. ... Consequently such prosecutions ceased." (ph, pg. 490).


"During 1891, President Woodruff's manifesto had been ratified in local Church conferences in every 'stake of Zion;' and a second General Conference had endorsed it in October of that year. President Woodruff, Councilor Joseph F. Smith and Apostle Lorenzo Snow went before the Federal Master in Chancery - in a proceeding to regain possession of escheated Church property - and swore that the manifesto had prohibited plural marriages, that it required a cessation of all plural marriage living, and that it was being obeyed by the Mormon people." (up, pp. 126-127).



Master in Chancery Hearings:

These hearings were to help decide where the escheated property would go. Many prominent church members testified here.

"About a year after the date of the Manifesto, the question of its scope, as affecting not only polygamous marriages, but also the continuance of polygamous living was made the subject of a searching inquiry before Judge C.F. Loofbourow, at Salt Lake City.  In explanation of this action, it should be known that the United States Supreme Court had decided that all Church property in the hands of the Receiver should remain there pending further action by the Utah courts, and Judge Loofbourow had been appointed a Master in Chancery, to take testimony and determine the uses to which the escheated property might best be applied. ... The hearing before the Master in Chancery took place in October, 1891.  Among the witnesses examined were Presidents Woodruff, Cannon, and Smith, and Elders Lorenzo Snow and Anthon H. Lund of the Council of the Twelve.  According to their testimony, the Manifesto enjoined obedience to the laws of the land enacted against plural marriage, both as to the ceremony and the cohabitation thereunder."  (ph, pp. 489-490).

"On the 19th of October, 1891, President Woodruff was cited before the Master and Chancery to testify to the scope of the Manifesto in the Escheat cases. The question there involved was the subject of unlawful cohabitation. He had issued the Manifesto and was therefore best qualified to interpret the meaning which it had to his mind, or which was conveyed by his language." (ww, pg. 577).



Petition for Amnesty:

"On December 18, 1891, the leaders of the Church petitioned the government for amnesty.  President Benjamin Harrison, who was skeptical of the Saints' sincerity, gradually changed.  By January 4, 1893, he issued a full pardon to those who had been guilty of unlawful cohabitation prior to November 1, 1890, and had obeyed the law since that time and pledged to do so in the future."  (en, pg. 388).





=== 1892 ===

January 15, 1892 - Judge Loofbourow filed his report stating that escheated property from the Church be used by public schools.
February 13, 1892 - Plea for Amnesty presented to Congress from Church authorities.
July 8, 1892 - The Utah Supreme Court ordered the Receiver to turn over all confiscated property to the Secretary of the Interior (Tithing House, Church farm, coal lands, Historian's Office, and the Guardo House).
November 12, 1892 - Judge Zane opinion that personal confiscated property can be used to help repair houses of worship and support the poor.


=== 1893 ===

January 4, 1893 - President Harrison issued a proclamation for amnesty.
April 6, 1893 - SLC Temple dedicated.
May 23, 1893 - SLC Temple opened for ordinances.
October 5, 1893 - Return of Church property - passed House.
October 21, 1893 - Return of Church property - passed Senate.
October 23, 1893 - Return of Church property - House concurs with Senate amendments.
October 25, 1893 - President signs the resolution returning personal Church property.
August 31, 1893 - Utah Supreme Court appoints John R. Winder Receiver for confiscated Church properties.



"A movement to restore the personal property, which had been taken without warrant of law, was already on foot, Delegate Rawlins having presented to Congress, during September, a resolution to that end.  This property was valued at about four hundred thousand dollars. ... By the resolution, the personal property and money of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, not arising from the sale or rents of real estate since March 3, 1887, was 'restored to said Church, to be applied under the direction and control of the First Presidency of said Church to the charitable uses and purposes thereof.'" (ph, pg. 502).


"In October of that year, Congress passed a bill restoring the property of the Church.  This act brought some financial relief and was a source of satisfaction to the Saints generally.  Litigation, however, over Church property had been a source of great waste to it.  Many who had urged the confiscation of Church property had realized some of their hopes in the dispossession of it as the litigation over the property had been a source of wealth to them, and although their hopes had been realized, their motives had been revealed."  (ww, pg. 584).





=== 1896 ===

"Statehood year was made memorable to the Latter-day Saints by the return of the Church's real property, taken by the Federal Government under the provisions of the Edmunds-Tucker Act.  The confiscated personal property was already restored, and now a joint resolution of the Senate and House, approved by President Cleveland March 28, 1896, returned in like manner the escheated real estate."  (ph, pg. 509).



Official Declaration 1

To Whom It May Concern:

Press dispatches having been sent for political purposes, from Salt Lake City, which have been widely published, to the effect that the Utah Commission, in their recent report to the Secretary of the Interior, allege that plural marriages are still being solemnized and that forty or more such marriages have been contracted in Utah since last June or during the past year, also that in public discourses the leaders of the Church have taught, encouraged and urged the continuance of the practice of polygamy—

I, therefore, as President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, do hereby, in the most solemn manner, declare that these charges are false. We are not teaching polygamy or plural marriage, nor permitting any person to enter into its practice, and I deny that either forty or any other number of plural marriages have during that period been solemnized in our Temples or in any other place in the Territory.

One case has been reported, in which the parties allege that the marriage was performed in the Endowment House, in Salt Lake City, in the Spring of 1889, but I have not been able to learn who performed the ceremony; whatever was done in this matter was without my knowledge. In consequence of this alleged occurrence the Endowment House was, by my instructions, taken down without delay.

Inasmuch as laws have been enacted by Congress forbidding plural marriages, which laws have been pronounced constitutional by the court of last resort, I hereby declare my intention to submit to those 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 teaching, he has been promptly reproved. And I now publicly declare that my advice to the Latter-day Saints is to refrain from contracting any marriage forbidden by the law of the land.

Wilford Woodruff
President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

President Lorenzo Snow offered the following:
“I move that, recognizing Wilford Woodruff as the 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 which has been read in our hearing, and which is dated September 24th, 1890, and that as a Church in General Conference assembled, we accept his declaration concerning plural marriages as authoritative and binding.”

The vote to sustain the foregoing motion was unanimous.
Salt Lake City, Utah, October 6, 1890.

Reference to the manifesto as contained in the current revision of the LDS Church's Doctrine and Covenants: Official Declaration 1

Thursday, October 28, 2010

LDS Church Supreme Court Cases (1880's and 1890's)



While looking up history and documentation, I read about a number of court cases that had been appealed all the way to the United States Supreme Court.  Most of these cases involved polygamists and the interpretation of the law concerning them, and some concerned the constitutionality of the laws passed to legislate the "Mormon problem."  As a way of making them easier to find (putting them all in one place), I put this post together.

This is NOT an exhaustive list, nor do the descriptions of the cases demonstrate a comprehensive knowledge of the case.  This is just a short list, with short descriptions to give an overview of each case.  The first trial is from 1878/1879, not exactly 1880, but it's close enough for me.  I saved 136 US 1 (Mormon Church v. U.S.) to the very end.  Although this was by far the longest read of any single case I went through, it was fascinating, I thought, to see how the Supreme Court handled this case. 

Many, many interesting ideas were put forth in all of the cases that I did not quote.  I leave further research for the interested reader, as each case has a web reference attached to it.

Other posts in this series:

  1. [George] Reynolds v. United States
    1. Reference:  98 US 145
    2. Argued:  November 14-15, 1878.  Decided:  May 5, 1879.
    3. 1874:  Church leaders, confident in the unconstitutionality of the Morrill Law (signed July 8, 1862), were anxious to have a "test case" brought before the Supreme Court concerning their First Amendment rights to practice religion.  They did not want to wait around for legislatures to get their polygamy bill right while many of their followers were being harassed.  So, when U.S. attorney, William Carey, promised to stop his attempts to indict Church leaders during the test case trial, the First Presidency (Brigham Young, George A. Smith, Daniel H. Wells) chose 32 year old George Reynolds, a secretary in the office of the Church president, and recently married for a second time to a plural wife, as a defendant (he volunteered) to stand in for the Church.  Reynolds cooperated completely with the prosecution's efforts against him.  He provided witnesses and other evidence necessary to prosecute the case successfully.  Reynolds was convicted in 1875, and sentenced to two years hard labor in prison and a fine of $500 dollars (later changed to 2 years imprisonment only).  The resultant conviction wasn't completely unexpected, but it just meant that appeal would be made to a higher court in the Territory.
    4. 1876:  Utah Territorial Supreme Court upholds the lower court ruling.  Appeal is made to the United States Supreme Court for a hearing on First Amendment rights.
    5. 1879:  Key phrase from the Supreme Court ruling:  "Laws are made for the government of actions, and while they cannot interfere with mere religious belief and opinions, they may with practices."  In other words, polygamy was ruled an outward practice that can be legislated against, and it will not interfere with 1st Amendment rights.
    6. Ruling was unanimous (9-0):  "Upon careful consideration of the whole case, we are satisfied that no error was committed by the court below.  Judgment affirmed."  The Morrill Anti-Bigamy Act of 1862, is constitutional; i.e., George Reynolds is guilty.
  2. [Rudger] Clawson v. United States
    1. Reference:  113 US 143
    2. Argued:  January 5, 1885.  Decided January 19, 1885.
    3. 1884, Oct:  Rudger Clawson is the first unlawful cohabitation case to be prosecuted under the Edmunds Act (signed March 22, 1882) with a trial jury; he is also Judge Charles Zane's first polygamy case.  Rudger Clawson was found guilty of polygamy and unlawful cohabitation by the jury.  He was sentenced to 4 years in prison and an $800 fine.
    4. First of two appeals:  Mr. Clawson was not allowed out on bail when an appeal was pending in the court system (territorial supreme court, etc.).  He sued for a writ of habeas corpus, which was denied.
    5. Ruling was unanimous (9-0):  "There is no error in the record, and the judgment is Affirmed."
  3. Murphy v. Ramsey
    1. Reference:  114 US 15
    2. Argued:  January 28, 1885.  Decided:  March 23, 1885.
    3. Five plaintiffs argued that the Utah Commission illegally barred them from voting in the November 1882 election after they supplied proper credentials, and accepted the proper oath. 
    4. Ruling was unanimous (9-0):  The court ruled that 3 of the 5 were living in a polygamous relationship, and were therefore ineligible to vote - Judgment affirmed.  For the other two, it was found that they should have been allowed to vote and their case was "remanded for further proceedings." 
    5. This ruling declared the Edmunds Act of 1882, constitutional and nullified the test oath formulated by the Utah Commission; they "have no power over the registration of voters or the conduct of elections."
  4. [Rudger] Clawson v. United States
    1. Reference:  114 US 477
    2. Argued:  April 8, 1885.  Decided:  April 20, 1885.
    3. Second of two appeals:  Mr. Clawson "moved to set aside the indictment on the ground that the grand jury was not legally constituted in that qualified grand jurors, drawn and summoned, were illegally excluded from the grand jury on the challenge of the prosecuting attorney that the grand jury selection was allowed improperly."
    4. Ruling was unanimous (9-0):  "The record shows no error, and the judgment is Affirmed."
  5. [Angus M.] Cannon v. United States
    1. Reference:  116 US 55
    2. Argued:  November 20, 23, 1885.  Decided:  December 14, 1885.
    3. 1885, Jan:  Angus M. Cannon, President of the Salt Lake Stake, was brought before a preliminary hearing on charges of polygamy and unlawful cohabitation.  In May 1885, he was convicted of unlawful cohabitation; sentenced to 6 months in prison and a $300 fine.
    4. In his appeal, he argued that he had not cohabited with his wives (intimately) since the passage of the Edmunds Law in March 1882; therefore, he could not be guilty of unlawful cohabitation.
    5. The Supreme Court defines unlawful cohabitation:  "Committed by a man who lives in the same house with two women, and eats at their respective tables one-third of his time, or thereabouts, and holds them out to the world, by his language or conduct, or both, as his wives, and it is not necessary to the commission of the offense that he and the two women, or either of them, should occupy the same bed or sleep in the same room or that he should have sexual intercourse with either of them."
    6. Ruling was not unanimous (7-2):  Judgment Affirmed.
      1. Dissenting opinion:  Mr. Justice Miller and Mr. Justice Field.  "I think that the act of Congress, when prohibiting cohabitation with more than one woman, meant unlawful habitual sexual intercourse. ... I know of no instance in which the word 'cohabitation' has been used to describe a criminal offense where it did not imply sexual intercourse."
  6. [Lorenzo] Snow v. United States
    1. Reference:  118 US 346
    2. Argued:  April 28-29, 1886.  Decided:  May 10, 1886.
    3. 1885, Nov:  Lorenzo Snow was arrested in Brigham City, Utah by 7 Deputy U.S. Federal Marshals.  He was indicted for unlawful cohabitation and stood trial for these offenses in December 1885.  He was the defendant in 3 separate indictments and trials for cohabiting with 7 women in 1883, 1884, and 1885.  He had, like Angus M. Cannon, lived with only one wife (Minnie) for a number of years.  He was convicted in each trial, and sentenced to 6 months in prison (18 months total) and $300 fine ($900 total - $21,000 today).  While his appeal was in process, he was released on $15,000 bail ($350,000 today).
    4. He appealed to the Supreme Court on a writ of error in the judgment rendered - the same as Angus M. Cannon used with his case.
    5. Ruling:  "There is no provision of law under which this Court can review a judgment of the Supreme Court of a Territory, on a conviction on an indictment for cohabiting with more than one woman [under Section 3 of the Edmunds Act] ... The question of jurisdiction was not considered in fact in that case, nor alluded to in the decision, nor presented to the Court by the counsel for the United States, nor referred to by either party at the argument or in the briefs. Probably both parties desired a decision on the merits. The question was overlooked by all the members of the Court. But as the case was decided at the present term and the want of jurisdiction in it is clear, we have decided to vacate our judgment and recall the mandate and dismiss the writ of error for want of jurisdiction in order that the reported decision may not appear to be a precedent for the exercise of jurisdiction by this Court in a case of the kind.  Dismissed for want of jurisdiction."
    6. In order to remain consistent, the court also recalled its mandate from the Cannon case and dismissed it also upon the same grounds - dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
  7. In Re [Lorenzo] Snow v. United States
    1. Reference:  120 US 274
    2. Argued:  January 21, 1887.  Decided:  February 7, 1887.
    3. Lorenzo Snow's attorney, Franklin S. Richards, filed a writ of habeas corpus after the first term of 6 months in prison had been served.  The writ was denied by Judge Zane, and then appealed.
    4. The court ruled that the three indictments were actually one continuous offense, and that the other two are combined into the first.  This ruling stopped the practice of "segregation" of offenses against polygamists.
    5. Ruling was unanimous (9-0):  "The order and judgment of the District Court for the Third Judicial District of Utah Territory must be reversed and the case be remanded to that court with a direction to grant the writ of habeas corpus prayed for and to take such proceedings thereon as may be in conformity with law and not inconsistent with the opinion of this court."
  8. Hans Nielson, Petitioner
    1. Reference:  131 US 176
    2. Argued:  April 19, 22, 1889.  Decided:  May 13, 1889.
    3. Hans Nielson was convicted of adultery and unlawful cohabitation with the same woman.  These were two separate indictments for the same offense.  He had been in prison for the full term of his unlawful cohabitation sentence when he sued for a writ of habeas corpus.  Like Lorenzo Snow's case before him, it was decided that each of the offenses was actually the same.
    4. Ruling was unanimous (9-0):  "... the conviction of the petitioner of the crime of unlawful cohabitation was a bar to his subsequent prosecution for the crime of adultery; that the court was without authority to give judgment and sentence in the latter case, and should have vacated and set aside the same when the petitioner applied for a habeas corpus; and that the writ should have been granted, and the petitioner discharged.  The judgment of the district court is reversed, and the cause remanded with directions to issue a habeas corpus as prayed for by the petitioner, and proceed thereon according to law."
  9. [Nephi W.] Clayton v. Utah Territory
    1. Reference:  132 US 632
    2. Argued:  December 5, 1889.  Decided:  January 6, 1890.
    3. Mr. Clayton assumed the office of Territorial Auditor in 1879, and was then duly elected to this position in 1880.  The Governor of the Territory of Utah (Eli H. Murray), appointed Arthur Pratt Territory Auditor in 1886; however, the legislature failed to approve of him or any other party brought before them for this position.  Mr. Clayton would not give up his office, paperwork, or anything else having to do with the position.
    4. "Under the organic act of that territory, the power to appoint an auditor of public accounts is vested exclusively in the governor and council."  Mr. Clayton is to vacate the office and turn over all materials of the office to Mr. Pratt.
    5. Ruling was unanimous (9-0):  The judgment of the supreme court of the Territory of Utah is Affirmed.
  10. [Samuel D.] Davis v. Beason
    1. Reference:  133 US 333
    2. Argued:  December 9-10, 1889.  Decided:  February 3, 1890.
    3. Samuel D. Davis registered to be a voter in Oneida County, Idaho, when he was a member of the Mormon Church, "which [he] knew taught, advised, counseled and encouraged its members and devotees to commit the crimes of bigamy and polygamy as duties arising and resulting from membership in said order."  To do this he lied when taking a "test oath" that stated he was not a member of any organization (like the Mormon Church).  He was found guilty and sentenced to pay a fine of $500, or in default of this payment, be remanded to the county jail for 250 days.
    4. Samuel D. Davis sued for a writ of habeas corpus charging that he was illegally imprisoned.
    5. "Bigamy and polygamy are crimes by the laws of the United States, by the laws of Idaho, and by the laws of all civilized and Christian countries, and to call their advocacy a tenet of religion is to offend the common sense of mankind."  This opinion is not open to any constitutional or legal objection.  Additionally, the admission of a test oath to every potential voter "is not open to any valid legal objection."
    6. Ruling was unanimous (9-0):  The judgment of the court below is therefore Affirmed.
  11. Mormon Church v. United States
    1. Reference:  136 US 1
    2. Argued:  January 16-18, 1889.  Decided:  May 19, 1890.
    3. The Edmunds-Tucker Act (took effect March 3, 1887) called for the dissolution of the Mormon Church (as a corporation), and forfeiture of all property owned by it (with exception of the Temple Block).  Estimates on February 19, 1887, put Church personal property value at $2 million, and real property value at $1 million.
    4. President John Taylor, as Trustee-in-Trust for the Church, transfered Church property to the Presiding Bishopric (William B. Preston, Robert T. Burton, and John R. Winder) for $1 and other ecclesiastical corporations after the passage of the Act.  These land/property transfers were called "secret trusts" by the court.  The defendant (the Church) avers that it owns no property at this time.  All conveyances of property were annulled by the court - "evidently intended as an evasion of the law that the court below justly regarded it as void and without force or effect."
    5. Receiver Frank Dyer holds the following properties:
      1. Temple Block - worth $500,000.  This was ordered to be given back.
      2. Gardo House and grounds, worth $50,000.
      3. Historians Office and grounds - worth $20,000.
      4. Tithing Office - worth $50,000.
      5. Tithing Office grounds - worth $25,000.
      6. Church Farm - worth $110,000.
      7. Coal lands in Summit County, Utah - worth $30,000.
      8. 800 shares of stock:  Salt Lake Gas Company.  4,732 shares of stock State of Deseret Telegraph Company.  30,158 sheep, $237,666.15 in cash ($5.6 million in 2010).
      9. Current aggregate property amount:  $750,000 ($17.7 million in 2010)
      10. No donations by way of 'tithing' or voluntary contributions are held by the receiver.
    6. Court findings:
      1. Edmunds-Tucker Law is constitutional.
      2. Congress has power to dissolve the corporation of the Church.
      3. Congress has power to dispose of the property of the Church.
    7. Ruling was not unanimous (6-3):  "We have carefully examined the decree, and do not find anything in it that calls for a reversal. It may perhaps require modification in some matters of detail, and for that purpose only the case is reserved for further consideration."
      1. Dissenting opinion:  Mr. Chief Justice Fuller, Mr. Justice Field, and Mr. Justice Lamar.  They felt that Congress had limitations and could not assume powers not specified by the constitution - this forced forfeiture of property/land with subsequent disposal of same being their example of overstepping constitutional powers.
      2. "... no such power as that involved in the act of Congress under consideration is conferred by the Constitution. ... absolute power should never be conceded as belonging under our system of government to anyone of its departments."
  12. Bassett v. United States
    1. Reference:  137 US 496
    2. Argued:  December 10, 1890.  Decided:  December 22, 1890.
    3. William E. Bassett was charged with polygamy and his wife was forced to testify against him, which led to his convition.
    4. "A husband cannot be examined for or against his wife without her consent, nor a wife for or against her husband without his consent, nor can either, during the marriage or afterwards, be, without the consent of the other, examined as to any communication made by one to the other during the marriage."
    5. Ruling was unanimous (9-0):  "The wife was an incompetent witness as against her husband ... The judgment of the supreme court of the Territory of Utah is reversed, and the case remanded, with instructions to order a new trial."
  13. Cope v. Cope
    1. Reference:  137 US 682
    2. Argued:  December 22, 1890.  Decided:  January 19, 1891.
    3. George A. Cope, son of Thomas Cope by a plural wife, is considered an illegitimate child of Mr. Cope, and is therefore unable to inherit anything from his father's estate.
    4. Ruling was unanimous (9-0):  "Our conclusion is that the appellant, George A. Cope, is entitled to a share in his father's estate, and the decree of the supreme court of the territory must therefore be Reversed."
  14. The Late Corporation of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints v. United States
    1. Reference:  150 US 145
    2. Submitted:  October 27, 1893.  Decided:  November 6, 1893.
    3. A Joint Resolution of Congress, signed October 25, 1893, nullifies the position of the confiscation of the personal property of the Church as spelled out in the Edmunds-Tucker Act of 1887.  The Supreme Court case Mormon Church v. U.S. ruled on this decision, and now Congress has seen fit to stop the property confiscation and return it to the Church.  This is a ruling on a decree to modify the language of the previous ruling (and law) to agree with the Congressional Joint Resolution.
    4. Ruling was unanimous (9-0):  Ordered accordingly.

Monday, June 21, 2010

Laws Against Polygamy - 1887 (Edmunds-Tucker Act)

On to the 3rd major law enacted by the Congress of the United States against the Mormon people, or probably a better way to say this, against the Mormon religious practice of polygamy.

As with the previous two major laws against polygamy that I've posted, I want to cover the history leading up to the passage of the bill itself.  For this law, the period of history will cover from 1882-1887.  For this post I decided to break it up into years, since that is an easy organizational method.


Other posts in this series:


=== 1882 ===

March 22, 1882 - Edmunds bill signed into law by President Chester A. Arthur.


April 7, 1882 - Conference talk by President John Taylor:
The morning of conference the weather was cold, stormy and windy; sleet was blowing and it was rather miserable outside. Using the storm as a metaphor for the Edmunds Law, he encourages the Saints to "put up our coat collars and wait till the storm subsides. ... While the storm lasts it is useless to reason with the world, when it subsides we can talk to them. ... God will take care of His people, if we will only do right" (B.H. Roberts, The Life of John Taylor, pp. 360-361).


April 19, 1882 - George Q. Cannon's seat declared vacant in the House of Representatives:
George Q. Cannon was elected as a representative of Utah Territory in November 1880; however, his seating was protested, and his seat was eventually declared vacant in April 1882. He was refused to sit because he was an admitted polygamist and the newly passed Edmunds Law made his election unlawful (Orson F. Whitney, Popular History of Utah, pp. 335-346).


September 16, 1882 - Hoar Amendment to Edmunds Law:
This allowed the Territorial Governor to appoint elected positions because the voter registration for the new law was not implemented yet (Whitney, Popular History of Utah, pp. 348-349).


Utah Commission:
One of the provisions of the Edmunds law, was the creation of the Utah Commission.  The five federally appointed men arrived in Utah in August 1882.  One of the challenges this group of men took on was the framing of a test oath for potential voters, which read, in part:
"I [name of individual] ... do further solemnly swear (or affirm) that I am not a bigamist or a polygamist; that I am not a violator of the laws of the United States prohibiting bigamy or polygamy; that I do not live or cohabit with more than one woman in the marriage relation, nor does any relation exist between me and any woman which has been entered into or continued in violation of the said law of the United States prohibiting bigamy or polygamy; and (if a woman) that I am not the wife of a polygamist, nor have I entered into any relation with any man in violation of the laws of the United States concerning polygamy or bigamy" (Whitney, Popular History of Utah, pg. 359).

This oath was objected to by the Mormon people of the Territory.  Here is B.H. Roberts' take on the oath, which I consider a prime example of the argument(s) against it:
"By this arrangement it will be seen that those who cohabited with more than one woman in adultery or prostitution, were not affected by its provisions.  The roue, the libertine, the strumpet, the brothel-keeper, the adulterer and adulteress could vote. No matter how licentious a man or a woman might be, all but the Mormons were screened and protected in the exercise of the franchise by the ingenious insertion of the clause, 'in the marriage relation,' a clause which nowhere appears in the Edmunds law" (Roberts, Life of John Taylor, pp. 369-370).

The Commission seemed intent on disfranchising a great number of people, even those not in violation of the anti-bigamy act.  "Once a polygamist, always a polygamist" became the reasoning behind their next act.  Anyone who had lived plurally since the 1862 anti-bigamy law was passed, was disqualified from registering to vote; even if that person had left the Mormon Church, hadn't lived plurally in 20 years, first wife had died, etc. If they lived in a polygamous relationship at all since 1862, they could not vote (Whitney, Popular History of Utah, pp. 360-361).


The Anti-Polygamy Prosecutions:
The United States Government was adamant in its determination to stamp out plural marriage, and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints remained firm in its adherence to that feature of its faith.  What followed was inevitable. ... a rigorous system of prosecution was carried on in Utah, Idaho and Arizona.  The Federal courts were kept busy trying cases under the Edmunds Law, and in Utah the Penitentiary was crowded with persons convicted under the operations of that stern statute.
     It was a time of terror and gloom.  Men and women were hunted like runaway slaves before the Civil War.  Hundreds of people, including many prominent citizens, were arrested or driven into exile.  Most of the men proceeded against were punished, not for marrying plural wives, but for living with those whom they had wedded prior to the enactment of the law under which they were prosecuted" (Whitney, Popular History of Utah, pg. 366).

Those who were at the center of the prosecutions:
  1. Governor Eli H. Murray
  2. Chief Justice Charles S. Zane
  3. Associate Justice Orlando W. Powers
  4. Associate Justice Jacob S. Boreman
  5. District Attorney William H. Dickson
  6. Assistant District Attorney Charles S. Varian
  7. United States Marshal Edward A. Ireland

October 13, 1882 - Revelation given to President John Taylor
This revelation called George Teasdale and Heber J. Grant to the Quorum of the Twelve, among other assignments and instructions.  A web reference to the revelation can be found here, or in print format here:  James R. Clark, Messages of the First Presidency, Vol. II, pp. 352-354.

In the Reed Smoot Hearings, when the topic of revelation was discussed, this specific revelation was mentioned by Joseph F. Smith as being one of the last authorized revelations received by the Church.

The key quote from the revelation is the following:
"... conform to my law; for it is not meet that men who will not abide my law shall preside over my priesthood."
The revelation was/is interpreted to mean that Church authorities (Stake Presidents, Bishops, and General Authorities) were required to obey God's laws in order to preside - this would include the law of plural marriage.



=== 1883 ===

=== 1884 ===

The great Crusade against the Mormon Church begins.
"The year 1884 was the beginning in the Church of a great crusade.  It was a land-mark in history.  What began that year is likely to be told from generation to generation.  The hardships that it brought to the Church and the trials which the people underwent were themes for household conversation throughout the entire Church.  The Edmunds law of 1882 had been put into effect so far as it related to the imprisonment of the Saints.  The enemy were at first occupied in its political phases.  As time went on it was seen that the disappointment of the enemy in the political advantages to be derived from the law became more apparent.  The law was really a disappointment to them.  The Utah commission which it established was filled by appointees from the East and those who were grasping for political power in the Territory found their hopes unrealized.  This disappointment led to a spirit of intensified anger and the criminal part of the law began receive its enforcement in the most drastic, spiteful, and revengeful manner.  Everything possible was done to prepare the people for dark days to come.  The revelations of God were to the effect that men should set their families in order" (Matthias F. Cowley, Wilford Woodruff: History of His Life and Labors, pp. 548-549).

October 15, 1884 - Rudger Clawson appears before Judge Charles S. Zane:
Rudger Clawson was the first unlawful cohabitation case to be prosecuted under the Edmunds law with a trial jury; he was also Judge Zane's first polygamy case.  B.H. Roberts remarked that this "case marks the inauguration of as cruel and unjustifiable a judicial crusade as was ever perpetrated against a free people in a professedly free government" (Roberts, Life of John Taylor, pg. 371).

As part of the proceedings, on Oct. 17, 1884, President John Taylor was put on the stand to answer questions about marriage records kept by the Church. The prosecuting attorney wanted to know about the plural marriage records kept in the Endowment House (on Temple Square) and specifically the record concerning the marriage of Rudger Clawson:
Mr. Dickson.  [Does such a record exist, and if so would you] "be good enough to produce it, or make inquiry concerning it?
Mr. Taylor.  I don't think I am good enough.
Mr. Dickson.  What is the ceremony of plural marriage?
Mr. Taylor.  I decline to state it.
Mr. Dickson.  Do you know whether the defendant has taken a plural wife?
Mr. Taylor.  I do not.
According to witnesses at the hearing, President Taylor smiled very big after declining to produce the marriage records.

Rudger Clawson was found guilty of polygamy and unlawful cohabitation by the jury.

On November 3, 1884, Rudger Clawson was allowed to address the court before sentencing was applied. His words, along with the response from Judge Zane were too good not to include in this history construct:
"Your Honor, I very much regret that the laws of my country should come in conflict with the laws of God; but whenever they do, I shall invariably choose the latter.  If I did not so express myself, I should feel unworthy of the cause I represent.  The Constitution of the United States expressly says that Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.  It cannot be denied, I think, that marriage, when attended and sanctioned by religious rites and ceremonies, is an establishment of religion.  The law of 1862 and the Edmunds Law were expressly designed to operate against marriage as practiced and believed in by the Latter-day Saints.  They are therefore unconstitutional, and of course cannot command the respect that a constitutional law would.  That is all I have to say, your Honor."
Judge Zane's response to Rudger Clawson's speech - after he meditated for several minutes:
"The Constitution of the United States, as construed by the Supreme Court, does not protect any person in the practice of polygamy.  While all men have a right to worship God according to the dictates of their own conscience, and to entertain any religious belief that their conscience and judgment may reasonably dictate, they have not the right to engage in a practice which the American people, through the laws of their country, declare to be unlawful and injurious to society ... I should have been inclined to make the punishment lighter had you not openly declared that you believe it right to violate the law."
Penalty sentence for Rudger Clawson - Judge Zane gave him the maximum allowed under law:
  • Polygamy (felony):  $500 fine and 3 yrs 6 months imprisonment.
  • Unlawful cohabitation (misdemeanor):  $300 fine and 6 month imprisonment to start with the expiration of the first.
Rudger Clawson appealed the ruling, and it resulted in two Supreme Court cases which were heard and decided against him in 1885 (Whitney, Popular History of Utah, pg. 381-385).

The tenaciousness with which the prosecutions were being carried out left little hope to those wishing to avoid prison time.  Many men and women exiled themselves to avoid being brought to justice.  Among those who disappeared at this time were leading men of the Church, such as members of the First Presidency, Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, and Seventies.  Elder Wilford Woodruff records this:  "I am a wanderer from home because of my religion.  It is not the first time I have been a wanderer in the wilderness for the gospel's sake."  President Joseph F. Smith, 2nd Counselor in the First Presidency, made himself scarce from October 1884 to September 1891 - not a single public appearance; he was in Hawaii on a Church mission for most of that time (Cowley, Wilford Woodruff, pg. 553; Whitney, Popular History of Utah, pg. 412).



=== 1885 ===

January 1885 - Angus M. Cannon arrested:
The prosecutions weren't having the affect desired - the disintegration of polygamy in Utah.  To help encourage the Mormon people not to break the law, Federal prosecutors decided to go after the leaders of the Church, or the so-called "pillars of the Church."  Their first indictment was handed down to Angus M. Cannon, President of the Salt Lake Stake of Zion (the "central" stake of the Church).  Although he wasn't at the top of their most-wanted list (the First Presidency and Apostles had the honor of that distinction), he was good enough to start with.  In late January 1885, Mr. Cannon was brought before a preliminary hearing on charges of polygamy and unlawful cohabitation.


January 1885 - Idaho Test Oath:
The Idaho legislature enacted a law providing that no polygamist, or any person who was a member of any order, organization, or association which taught, advised, counseled, or encouraged its members to practice polygamy, should be permitted to vote at any election, or to hold any office of honor, trust, or profit within that Territory.  The law incorporated a "test oath" on those points. This effectively meant that all Mormons, whether they were polygamists or not, were disfranchised solely because they were members of the church, not because they had broken any law.

James E. Hart proposed an amendment to the oath, before it was passed, that would only disfranchise Church members who actually were practicing polygamy:
You do solemnly swear that you are not a bigamist or a polygamist or that you do not cohabit with any other woman who is not your wife.
Upon hearing this motion, Judge Brierley of Alturas County jumped to the floor and shouted: "My G-- Gentlemen. We can't accept Hart's proposal. That would disfranchise all of us."  I find it funny that legislators were out to get the big-bad Mormons; however, some of them led immoral lives and didn't want that legislated against.  The oath passed as originally written, keeping LDS Church members in Idaho from voting for 10 years, and was ruled constitutional on Feb. 3, 1890, by the Supreme Court of the United States (Rich, Ensign to the Nations, pg. 381; Supreme Court hearing: 133 US 333).


January 19, 1885 - Supreme Court case:  Clawson v. United States:  113 US 143
This is the first of two appeals to the Supreme Court for Rudger Clawson. The Court ruled that Rudger Clawson did not need to be released on bail while an appeal was pending if the court of jurisdiction decided so.  Judgment affirmed.


Trial Judges Attempt to be Merciful:
During trials for unlawful cohabitation, prior to sentence being pronounced, the judge would give each convicted man the opportunity to promise to keep the law.  If they would do so, invariably the judge would either (a) set them free, or (b) drastically reduce the sentence.  However, very few men took advantage of this opportunity.  According to Matthias Cowley, the men who did take the judge up on the offer were men who "were not in harmony with the requirements of the gospel and those times gave them an opportunity to demonstrate their unworthiness rather than a lack of courage."  The courts were busy at this time, and E.B. Critchlow (a judge during this time) states that over one thousand men were convicted, and rarely did any accept the offer to stop breaking the law (Cowley, Wilford Woodruff, pg. 555; Reed Smoot Testimony, E.B. Critchlow).


Property Purchased in Mexico:
The Church could do relatively little about this law or the prosecutions going on.  They felt as if they were being persecuted, instead of prosecuted, by an illegal law.  One option they did have was to relocate "wanted" church members to a place where the US Government could not reach them - legally; one of these locations was Mexico.  Accordingly, land was purchased in Mexico "upon which families that were hunted and driven might settle."  This isn't the birth of the Mormon Colonies in Mexico; however, it does explain why there were a number of polygamist families that moved and lived there.  Wikipedia has a decent history review on this (Mormon Colonies in Mexico) (Whitney, Popular History of Utah, pg. 395).


February 1, 1885 - President Taylor's last public sermon:
"What would you do?  Would you resent these outrages and break the heads of the men engaged in them, and spill their blood?  No; avoid them as much as you possibly can - just as you would wolves, or hyenas, or crocodiles, or snakes, or any of these beasts or reptiles. ... Get out of their way as much as you can.  What!  Won't you submit to the dignity of the law?  Well I would if the law would only be a little more dignified.  But when we see the dignity of the ermine bedragged in the mud and mire, and every principle of justice violated, it behooves men to take care of themselves as best they can. ... But no breaking of heads, no bloodshed, rendering evil for evil.  Let us try to cultivate the spirit of the gospel, and adhere to the principles of truth. ... While other men are seeking to trample the Constitution under foot, we will try to maintain it. ... I will tell you what you will see by and by.  You will see trouble!  trouble!  TROUBLE enough in these United States.  And as I have said before, I say today - I tell you in the name of God, WOE! to them that fight against Zion, for God will fight against them!"  (Roberts, Life of John Taylor, pp. 383-384).


March 23, 1885 - Supreme Court case:  Murphy v. Ramsey:  114 US 15
Five plaintiffs argued that the Utah Commission of 5 men illegally barred them from voting in the November 1882 election after they supplied credentials, and accepted the proper oath.  The court ruled that 3 of the 5 were living in a polygamous relationship, and were therefore ineligible to vote - Judgment affirmed.  For the other two, it was found that they should have been allowed to vote and their case was "remanded for further proceedings."  This ruling declared the Edmunds law constitutional and nullified the test oath formulated by the Utah Commission; they "have no power over the registration of voters or the conduct of elections."


April 20, 1885 - Supreme Court case:  Clawson v. United States:  114 US 477
The is the second of two appeals to the Supreme Court by Rudger Clawson.  The Court ruled that the grand jury selection was competent for his trial.  Judgment affirmed.


May 9, 1885:  Angus M. Cannon, A. Milton Musser, and James C. Watson brought before Judge Zane:
All three are sentenced for unlawful cohabitation:  $300 fine and 6 months in prison.


May 13, 1885:  Declaration of Grievances and Protest:
"To the President and People of the United States" - petition sent by the First Presidency and members of the Church to Washington, "we solemnly protest against the continuance of this merciless crusade."  John T. Caine, John W. Taylor, and John Q. Cannon gave the protest to President Cleveland.  The President promised to appoint fair and even-minded men to Utah positions to ensure that "the law is impartially administered"  (Whitney, Popular History of Utah, pg. 414-415).


September 16, 1885 - "Segregation" doctrine introduced:
Judge Zane wanted stiffer penalties than the Edmunds Law would allow for conviction.  The relatively light sentences were not having the desired effect.  He subsequently ruled that "the time a man had cohabited with more women than one as wives, could be divided up into years, months or weeks, and separate bills of indictment be found for each fragment of time. ...  Judge Orlando W. Powers of the First Judicial District, carried the infamous doctrine still further, and in charging a grand jury, on the 23rd of September, 1885, said:  'An indictment may be found against a man guilty of unlawful cohabitation, for every day, or other distinct interval of time, during which he offends.  Each day that a man cohabits with more than one woman, as I have defined the word cohabit, is a distinct and separate violation of the law, and he is liable for punishment for each separate offense'" (Roberts, Life of John Taylor, pp. 388-390).


Deseret News Editorial on 'Segregation':
According to this proposition, the obnoxious 'Mormon' could be sentenced to an aggregated term of five hundred and forty-seven years and six months, and compelled to pay a fine of $328,400.  If he happened to be impecunious, he could be made to remain in prison for ninety-one years and three months longer, in order to satisfy the poor convict act.

Why not extend its penalties to the other life?
--John Nicholson, editor of the Deseret News when Charles W. Penrose was away (Whitney, Popular History of Utah, pg. 409).


November 20, 1885:
Lorenzo Snow is arrested in Brigham City by 7 deputy marshals.  He serves over 6 months in prison for unlawful cohabitation and is released.  Reference for the trial of Lorenzo Snow: Whitney, Popular History of Utah, pp. 423-426.


December 14, 1885 - Supreme Court case:  Cannon v. United States:  116 US 55
Angus M. Cannon appealed his conviction to the Supreme Court.  He argued that he had not cohabited with his wives (intimately) since the passage of the Edmunds Law; therefore, he could not be guilty of unlawful cohabitation.  The Supreme Court, however, agreed with lower court rulings that Angus M. Cannon is guilty of unlawful cohabitation, even if there is not a sexual relationship with his wives.  Judgment affirmed.  They defined the term 'unlawful cohabitation' as follows:
"Committed by a man who lives in the same house with two women, and eats at their respective tables one-third of his time, or thereabouts, and holds them out to the world, by his language or conduct, or both, as his wives, and it is not necessary to the commission of the offense that he and the two women, or either of them, should occupy the same bed or sleep in the same room or that he should have sexual intercourse with either of them."

Edmunds Law Considered a Disappointment:
The attitude of most of the defendants impleaded thereunder convinced those who were working for the suppression of plural marriage that they had undertaken a much harder task than they anticipated.  Neither the makers nor the ministers of the law had given the men and women who practiced this form of marriage sufficient credit for sincerity.  Imputing to them unworthy motives, they supposed even light penalties would induce them to recede from their position and sever their peculiar relations.  They found this to be an error.  The Anti-Bigamy Law had always been a dead letter, inoperative, ineffectual; and now the Edmunds Act; its original severity enhanced by the extreme interpretations put upon it, had failed to accomplish its purpose.  More legislation must be had, or existing laws must be made more effective, if success was to crown the efforts put forth for the extirpation of polygamy.  So reasoned the prosecutors and the judges (Whitney, Popular History of Utah, pg. 407).



=== 1886 ===

The highest point of intensity in the crusade against the Latter-day Saints was reached during the year 1886 ... Hundreds were in prison and in exile and leading men were hunted down with a fury perhaps unsurpassed by the Roman persecutions in the days of the early Christians. ... [Wilford] felt that the Lord would fight the battles of the Saints and that those who were prominent in the persecution would be humiliated (Cowley, Wilford Woodruff, pg. 557).


February 12, 1886 - George Q. Cannon arrested:
"My father believed that if he left Utah, his recession might tend to placate the government and soften the severity of the prosecutions of the Mormons; and accordingly, on the night of February 12, 1886, he boarded a west-bound Central Pacific train at Willard.  The Federal officers in some way learned of it; he was arrested, on the train, at Humboldt Wells, Nevada, and brought back to Utah.  Near Promontory he fell from the steps of the moving car, at night, in the midst of an alkali desert, and hurt himself seriously.  He was recaptured and brought to Salt Lake City on a stretcher, in a special car, guarded by a squad of soldiers from Fort Douglas, with loaded muskets, and a captain with a conspicuous sword.  He was taken to Judge Zane's chambers and placed under bonds of $25,000.  Immediately two bench warrants were issued by a United States Commissioner, and these were served upon him while he lay on a mattress on the floor of Zane's office.  Two more bonds of $10,000 each were given.  He was then taken to his home.

"Later - (President [John] Taylor still insisting that he must not stand trial) - he disappeared again, 'on the underground,' and his bonds were declared forfeited" (Frank J. Cannon, Under The Prophet In Utah, pg. 46-47).

May 10, 1886 - Supreme Court case:  Snow v. United States:  118 US 346
Is there such a thing as "constructive cohabitation?"  What are these people to do?  The Court did not want to rule on the question.  Instead they decided that they had no jurisdiction in the case; therefore, it was Dismissed for want of jurisdiction.


September 27, 1886 - Revelation give to President John Taylor concerning Plural Marriage:
Below is a copy of this purported revelation given to John Taylor. I say "purported" simply because the LDS Church does not accept this document as authentic.

Here's a link to a copy of the handwritten revelation - here:
My son John, you have asked me concerning the New and Everlasting Covenant how far it is binding upon my people.

Thus saith the Lord: All commandments that I give must be obeyed by those calling themselves by my name unless they are revoked by me or by my authority, and how can I revoke an everlasting covenant, for I the Lord am everlasting and my everlasting covenants cannot be abrogated nor done away with, but they stand forever.

Have I not given my word in great plainness on this subject? Yet have not great numbers of my people been negligent in the observance of my law and the keeping of my commandments, and yet have I borne with them these many years; and this because of their weakness—because of the perilous times, and furthermore, it is more pleasing to me that men should use their free agency in regard to these matters. Nevertheless, I the Lord do not change and my word and my covenants and my law do not, and as I have heretofore said by my servant Joseph: All those who would enter into my glory must and shall obey my law. And have I not commanded men that if they were Abraham’s seed and would enter into my glory, they must do the works of Abraham. I have not revoked this law, nor will I, for it is everlasting, and those who will enter into my glory must obey the conditions thereof; even so, Amen.
I put this in because it is a piece of history.  If true, it helps to explain why John Taylor, and by extension, the Church and Church authorities, are so stubborn during this time in their resistance of the Federal Government and the laws enacted by Congress to do away with polygamy.  It's another piece of the puzzle in this history.

Currently the LDS Church denies that this revelation is either (a) authentic, or (b) exists; despite evidence to the contrary that they do in fact know about it.  I am uninterested in following this tangent to where it leads - Mormon fundamentalism.  For me, the revelation is the history I'm interested in, not what others have done with it.  I'll leave this as an exercise for the interested reader/researcher.

To follow this thread, here's a few good references to start with:
  • Masters Thesis of Dean C. Jessee (link - here).  Page 95 is as good a place as any to begin reading.
  • Official Statement on Plural Marriage June 17 1933; James R. Clark, Messages of the First Presidency of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Vol. V, pp. 315-330.
  • Web URL to Four Hidden Revelations - referenced above for the 1886 revelation. The history behind this is very much in dispute as can be seen by following these links.


=== 1887 ===

February 7, 1887 - Supreme Court case:  In Re Snow:  120 US 274
Lorenzo Snow's lawyer, Franklin S. Richards, changed the appeal to question the number of indictments.  This time the Court ruled it had jurisdiction, and found that individual indictments for separate periods of cohabitation time is illegal.  They stated that the offense was continuous, and therefore was answerable under a single indictment.  For Lorenzo Snow this meant that 2 of the 3 indictments for unlawful cohabitation were wiped clean, and so an 18 month sentence (3 back-to-back terms) was reduced to one term of 6 months; he had already served more than 6 months at this time.

"This ruling shattered the doctrine of segregation, and put a stop to the practice.  Lorenzo Snow, an order for whose release was telegraphed from Washington, left the penitentiary soon after the decision was rendered.  Six others imprisoned under the segregating process likewise regained their liberty"  (Whitney, Popular History of Utah, pg. 443).

The order and judgment of the District Court for the Third Judicial District of Utah Territory must be reversed and the case be remanded to that court with a direction to grant the writ of habeas corpus prayed for and to take such proceedings thereon that may be in conformity with law and not inconsistent with the opinion of this Court.


March 3, 1887 - Edmunds-Tucker Act becomes law:
On February 19, 1887, the bill passed Congress and was shortly thereafter placed on the President's desk (Grover Cleveland).  After waiting for, and not receiving the President's signature, the bill automatically became a law on March 3, 1887.


Reasoning ? for waiting years for a new anti-polygamy bill to pass:
"As early as December, 1882, Senator Edmunds had introduced into Congress a bill to amend the law bearing his name.  This bill, which died almost at its birth, but experienced repeated resurrections, was finally enacted as the Edmunds-Tucker Law, so named for its principal promoters, Senator George F. Edmunds, of Vermont, and Representative John Randolph Tucker, of Virginia.  It took five years to produce this statute; not because those friendly to it were idle or indifferent the while, but owing to a desire on the part of many Congressmen, some of whom believed the Edmunds Law had strained the Constitution, to allow the medicine already administered to do its work, before foisting upon the over-dosed patient another prescription." (Whitney, Popular History of Utah, pg. 445).


July 25, 1887 - President John Taylor dies:
From February 1, 1885 until July 25, 1887, John Taylor remained hidden.  He was never publicly seen again.  He communicated with the Church via "general epistles" that were delivered in the dark of night by couriers (Church History in the Fulness of Times, pg. 443).  From the 3rd Volume of Messages of the First Presidency, by James R. Clark, I count 11 official messages, 5 of which are labeled "epistles."


In summary, here are the main points of this law:
  1. In a polygamy / unlawful cohabitation case, the lawful husband or wife is a competent witness.
  2. Adultery, incest, and fornication are punishable crimes (prison time or fine).
  3. All marriage ceremonies are to be recorded publicly.
  4. All polygamous children born prior to 12 months after the passage of this act are legitimized.
  5. The Attorney-General of the United States will institute proceedings on forfeited or escheated property as designated under the 1862 Morrill Anti-Bigamy Act (Section 3).  For Utah, this primarily means property from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and the Perpetual Emigration Fund Company.
  6. The Church and Perpetual Emigration Fund Company were disincorporated.
  7. Women could no longer vote in Utah.
  8. Nauvoo Legion and local militia were abolished.
  9. Anyone convicted of polygamy or unlawful cohabitation were disfranchised.
  10. To vote, you had to promise to obey the law (polygamy laws) and not teach others to break it.

The law from 1887 is copied below in its entirety - hopefully the typos are minimal to non-existent.


The Statutes at Large of the United States of America
From December, 1885, to March, 1887
Volume XXIV [24] - reference pages 635-641

March 3, 1887
Chapter 397 - An act to amend an act entitled "An act to amend section fifty-three hundred and fifty-two of the Revised Statutes of the United States, in reference to bigamy, and for other purposes," approved March twenty-second, eighteen hundred and eighty-two.

     Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, Sec. 1.  That in any proceeding or examination before a grand jury, a judge, justice, or a United States commissioner, or a court, in any prosecution for bigamy, polygamy, or unlawful cohabitation, under any statute of the United States, the lawful husband or wife of the person accused shall be a competent witness, and may be called, but shall not be compelled to testify in such proceeding, examination, or prosecution without the consent of the husband or wife, as the case may be; and such witness shall not be permitted to testify as to any statement or communication made by either husband or wife to each other, during the existence of the marriage relation, deemed confidential at common law.

     Sec. 2.  That in an prosecution for bigamy, polygamy, or unlawful cohabitation under any statute of the United States, whether before a United States commissioner, justice, judge, a grand jury, or any court, an attachment for any witness may be issued by the court, judge, or commissioner, without a previous subpoena, compelling the immediate attendance of such witness, when it shall appear by oath or affirmation, to the commissioner, justice, judge, or court, as the case may be, that there is reasonable ground to believe that such witness will unlawfully fail to obey a subpoena issued and served in the usual course in such cases; and in such case the usual witness-fee shall be paid to such witness so attached:  Provided, That the person so attached may at any time secure his or her discharge from custody by executing a recognizance with sufficient surety, conditioned for the appearance of such person at the proper time, as a witness in the cause or proceeding where in the attachment may be issued.

     Sec. 3.  That whoever commits adultery shall be punished by imprisonment in the penitentiary not exceeding three years; and when the act is committed between a married woman and a man who is unmarried, both parties to such act shall be deemed guilty of adultery; and when such act is committed between a married man and a woman who is unmarried, the man shall be deemed guilty of adultery.

     Sec. 4.  That if any person related to another person within and not including the fourth degree of consanguinity computed according to the rules of the civil law, shall marry or cohabit with, or have sexual intercourse with such other so related person, knowing her or him to be within said-degree of relationship, the person so offending shall be deemed guilty of incest, and, on conviction thereof, shall be punished by imprisonment in the penitentiary not less than three years and not more than fifteen years.

     Sec. 5.  That if an unmarried man or woman commit fornication, each of them shall be punished by imprisonment not exceeding six months, or by fine not exceeding one hundred dollars.

     Sec. 6.  That all laws of the legislative assembly of the Territory of Utah which provide that prosecutions for adultery can only be commenced on the complaint of the husband or wife are hereby disapproved and annulled; and all prosecutions for adultery may hereafter be instituted in the same way that prosecutions for other crimes are.

     Sec. 7.  That commissioners appointed by the supreme court and district courts in the Territory of Utah shall possess and may exercise all the powers and jurisdiction that are or may be possessed or exercised by justices of the peace in said Territory under the laws thereof, and the same powers conferred by law on commissioners appointed by circuit courts of the United States.

     Sec. 8.  That the marshal of said Territory of Utah, and his deputies, shall possess and may exercise all the powers in executing the laws of the United States or of said Territory, possessed and exercised by sheriffs, constables, and their deputies as peace officers; and each of them shall cause all offenders against the law, in his view, to enter into recognizant to keep the peace and to appear at the next term of the court having jurisdiction of the case, and to commit to jail in case of failure to give such recognizance.  They shall quell and suppress assaults and batteries, riots, routs, affrays, and insurrections.

     Sec. 9.  That every ceremony of marriage, or in the nature of a marriage ceremony, of any kind, in any of the Territories of the United States, whether either or both or more of the parties to such ceremony be lawfully competent to be the subjects of such marriage or ceremony or not, shall be certified by a certificate stating the fact and nature of such ceremony, the full names of each of the parties concerned, and the full name of every officer, priest, and person, by whatever style or designation called or known, in any way taking part in the performance of such ceremony, and shall be by the officer, priest, or other person solemnizing such marriage or ceremony filed in the office of the probate court, or, if there be none, in the office of court having probate powers in the county or district in which such ceremony shall take place, for record, and shall be immediately recorded, and be at all times subject to inspection as other public records.  Such certificate, or the record thereof, or a duly certified copy of such record, shall be prima facie evidence of the facts required by this act to be stated therein, in any proceeding, civil or criminal, in which the matter shall be drawn in question.  Any person who shall willfully violate any of the provisions of this section shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and shall, on conviction thereof, be punished by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars, or by imprisonment not longer than two years, or by both said punishments, in the discretion of the court.

     Sec. 10.  That nothing in this act shall be held to prevent the proof of marriages, whether lawful or unlawful, by any evidence now legally admissible for that purpose.

     Sec. 11.  That the laws enacted by the legislative assembly of the Territory of Utah which provide for or recognize the capacity of illegitimate children to inherit or to be entitled to any distributive share in the estate of the father of any such illegitimate child are hereby disapproved and annulled; and no illegitimate child shall hereafter be entitled to inherit from his or her father or to receive and distributive share in the estate of his or her father:  Provided, That this section shall not apply to any illegitimate child born within twelve months after the passage of this act, nor to any child made legitimate by the seventh section of the act entitled "An act to amend section fifty-three hundred and fifty-two of the Revised Statutes of the United States, in reference to giamy, and for other purposes", approved March twenty-second, eighteen hundred and eighty-two.

     Sec. 12.  That the laws enacted by the legislative assembly of the Territory of Utah conferring jurisdiction upon probate courts, or the judges thereof, or any of them, in said Territory, other than in respect of the estates of deceased persons, and in respect of the guardianship of the persons and property of infants, and in respect of the persons and property of persons not of sound mind, are hereby disapproved and annulled; and no probate court or judge of probate shall exercise any jurisdiction other than in respect of the matters aforesaid, except as a member of a county court; and every such jurisdiction so by force of this act withdrawn from the said probate courts or judges shall be had and exercised by the district courts of said Territory respectively.

     Sec. 13.  That it shall be the duty of the Attorney-General of the United States to institute and prosecute proceedings to forfeit and escheat to the United States the property of corporations obtained or held in violation of section three of the act of Congress approved the first day of July, eighteen hundred and sixty-two, entitled "An act to punish and prevent the practice of polygamy in the Territories of the United States and other places, and disapproving and annulling certain acts of the legislative assembly of the Territory of Utah", or in violation of section eighteen hundred and sixty-two, entitled "An act to punish and prevent the practice of polygamy in the Territories of the United States and other places, and disapproving and annulling certain acts of the legislative assembly of the Territory of Utah", or in violation of section eighteen hundred and ninety of the Revised Statutes of the United States; and all such property so forfeited and escheated to the United States shall be disposed of by the Secretary of the Interior, and the proceeds thereof applied to the use and benefit of the common schools in the Territory in which such property may be:  Provided, That no building, or the grounds appurtenant thereto, which is held and occupied exclusively for purposes of the worship of God, or parsonage connected therewith, or burial ground shall be forfeited.

     Sec. 14.  That in any proceeding for the enforcement of the provisions of law against corporations or associations acquiring or holding property in any Territory of the United States in excess of the amount limited by law, the court before which such proceeding may be instituted shall have power in a summary way to compel the production of all books, records, papers, and documents of or belonging to any trustee or person holding or controlling or managing property in which such corporation may have any right, title, or interest whatever.

     Sec. 15.  That all laws of the legislative assembly of the Territory of Utah, or of the so-called government of the State of Deseret, creating, organizing, amending, or continuing the corporation or association called the Perpetual Emigrating Fund Company are hereby disapproved and annulled; and the said corporation, in so far as it may now have, or pretend to have, any legal existence, is hereby dissolved; and it shall not be lawful for the legislative assembly of the Territory of Utah to create, organize, or in any manner recognize any such corporation or association, or to pass any law for the purpose of or operating to accomplish the bringing of persons into the said Territory for any purpose whatsoever.

     Sec. 16.  That it shall be the duty of the Attorney-General of the United States to cause such proceedings to be taken in the supreme court of the Territory of Utah as shall be proper to carry into effect the provisions of the preceding section, and pay the debts and to dispose of the property and assets of said corporation according to law.  Said property and assets, in excess of the debts and the amount of any lawful claims established by the court against the same, shall escheat to the United States, and shall be taken, invested, and disposed of by the Secretary of the Interior, under the direction of the President of the United States, for the benefit of common schools in said Territory.

     Sec. 17.  That the acts of the legislative assembly of the Territory of Utah incorporating, continuing, or providing for the corporation known as the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-DayDeseret incorporating the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, so far as the same may now have legal force and validity, are hereby disapproved and annulled, and the said corporation, in so far as it may now have, or pretend to have, and legal existence, is hereby dissolved.  That it shall be the duty of the Attorney-General of the United States to cause such proceedings to be taken in the supreme court of the Territory of Utah as shall be proper to execute the foregoing provisions of this section and to wind up the affairs of said corporation conformably to law; and in such proceedings the court shall have power, and it shall be its duty, to make such decree or decrees as shall be proper to effectuate the transfer of the title to real property now held and used by said corporation for places of worship, and parsonages connected therewith, and burial grounds and of the description mentioned in the proviso to section thirteen of this act and in section twenty-six of this act, to the respective trustees mentioned in section twenty-six of this act; and for the purposes of this section said court shall have all the powers of a court of equity.

     Sec. 18. (a)  A widow shall be endowed of third part of all the lands whereof her husband was seized of an estate of inheritance at any time during the marriage unless she shall have lawfully released her right thereto.

     (b)  The widow of any alien who at the time of his death shall be entitled by law to hold any real estate, if she be an inhabitant of the Territory at the time of such death, shall be entitled to dower of such estate in the same manner as if such alien had been a native citizen.

     (c)  If a husband seized of an estate of inheritance in lands exchanges them for other lands, his widow shall not have dower of both, but shall make her election to be endowed of the lands given or of those taken in exchange; and if such election be not evinced by the commencement of proceedings to recover her dower of the lands given in exchange within one year after the death of her husband, she shall be deemed to have elected to take her dower of the lands received in exchange.

     (d)  When a person seized of an estate of inheritance in lands shall have executed a mortgage, or other conveyance in the nature of mortgage, of such estate, before marriage, his widow shall nevertheless be entitled to dower out of the lands mortgaged or so conveyed, as against every person except the mortgagee or grantee in such conveyance and those claiming under him.

     (e)  Where a husband shall purchase lands during coverture, and shall at the same time execute a mortgage, or other conveyance in the nature of mortgage, of his estate in such lands to secure the payment of the purchase-money, his widow shall not be entitled to dower out of such lands, as against the mortgagee or grantee in such conveyance or those claiming under him, although she shall not have united in such mortgage; but she shall be entitled to her dower in such lands as against all other persons.

     (f)  Where in such case the mortgagee, or such grantee or those claiming under him, shall, after the death of the husband of such widow, cause the land mortgaged or so conveyed to be sold, either under a power of sale contained in the mortgage or such conveyance or by virtue of the decree of a court if any surplus shall remain after payment of the moneys due on such mortgage or such conveyance, and the costs and charges of the sale, such widow shall nevertheless be entitled to the interest or income of the one-third part of such surplus for her life, as her dower.

     (g)  A widow shall not be endowed of lands conveyed to her husband by way of mortgage unless he acquire an absolute estate therein during the marriage period.

     (L)  In case of divorce dissolving the marriage contract for the misconduct of the wife, she shall not be endowed.

     Sec. 19.  That hereafter the judge of probate in each county within the Territory of Utah provided for by the existing laws thereof shall be appointed by the President of the United States, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate; and so much of the laws of said Territory as provide for the election of such judge by the legislative assembly are hereby disapproved and annulled.

     Sec. 20.  That it shall not be lawful for any female to vote at any election hereafter held in the Territory of Utah for any public purpose whatever, and no such vote shall be received or counted or given effect in any manner whatever; and any and every act of the legislative assembly of the Territory of Utah providing for or allowing the registration or voting by females is hereby annulled.

     Sec. 21.  That all laws of the legislative assembly of the Territory of Utah which provide for numbering or identifying the votes of the electors at any election in said Territory are hereby disapproved and annulled; but the foregoing provision shall not preclude the lawful registration of voters, or any other provisions for securing fair elections which do not involve the disclosure of the candidates for whom any particular elector shall have voted.

     Sec. 22.  That the existing election districts and apportionments of representation concerning the members of the legislative assembly of the Territory of Utah are hereby abolished; and it shall be the duty of the governor, Territorial secretary, and Board of Commissioners mentioned in section nine of the act of Congress approved March twenty-second, eighteen hundred and eighty-two entitled "An act to amend section fifty-three hundred and fifty-two of the Revised Statutes of the United States in reference to bigamy, and for other purposes", in said Territory, forthwith to redistrict said Territory, and apportion representation in the same in such manner as to provide, as nearly as may be, for an equal representation of the people (excepting Indians not taxed), being citizen of the United States, according to numbers, in said legislative assembly, and to the number of members of the council and house of representatives, respectively, as now established by law; and a record of the establishment of such new districts and the apportionment of representation thereto shall be made in the office of the secretary of said Territory, and such establishment and representation shall continue until Congress shall otherwise provide; and no persons other than citizens of the United States otherwise qualified shall be entitled to vote at any election in said Territory.

     Sec. 23.  That the provisions of section nine of said act approved March twenty-second, eighteen hundred and eighty-two, in regard to registration and election officers, and the registration of voters, and the conduct of elections, and the powers and duties of the Board therein mentioned, shall continue and remain operative until the provisions and laws therein referred to to be made and enacted by the legislative assembly of said Territory of Utah shall have been made and enacted by said assembly and shall have been approved by Congress.

     Sec. 24.  That every male person twenty-one years of age resident in the Territory of Utah shall, as a condition precedent to his right to register or vote at any election in said Territory, take and subscribe an oath or affirmation, before the registration officer of his voting precinct, that he is over twenty-one years of age, and has resided in the Territory of Utah for six months then last passed and in the precinct for one month immediately preceding the date thereof, and that he is a native-born (or naturalized, as the case may be) citizen of the United States, and further state in such oath or affirmation his full name, with his age, place of business, his status, whether single or married, and, if married, the name of his lawful wife, and that he will support the Constitution of the United States and will faithfully obey the laws thereof, and especially will obey the act of Congress approved March twenty-second, eighteen hundred and eighty-two, entitled "An act to amend section fifty-three hundred and fifty-two of the Revised Statutes of the United States, in reference to bigamy, and for other purposes," and will also obey this this act in respect of the crimes in said act defined and forbidden, and that he will not, directly or indirectly, aid, abet, counsel, or advise, any other person to commit any of said crimes.  Such registration officer is authorized to administer said oath or affirmation; and all such oaths or affirmations shall be by him delivered to the clerk of the probate court of the proper county, and shall be deemed public records therein.  But if any election shall occur in said Territory before the next revision of the registration lists as required by law, the said oath or affirmation shall be administered by the presiding judge of the election precinct on or before the day of election.  As a condition precedent to the right to hold office in or under said Territory, the officer, before entering on the duties of his office, shall take and subscribe an oath or affirmation declaring his full name, with his age, place of business, his status, whether married or single, and, if married, the name of his lawful wife, and that he will support the Constitution of the United States and will faithfully obey the laws thereof, and especially will obey the act of Congress approved March twenty-second, eighteen hundred and eighty-two, entitled "An act to amend section fifty-three hundred and fifty-two of the Revised Statutes of the United States, in reference to bigamy, and for other purposes," and will also obey this act in respect of the crimes in said act defined and forbidden, and that he will not, directly or indirectly, aid or abet, counsel or advise, any other person to commit any of said crimes; which oath or affirmation shall be recorded in the proper office and indorsed on the commission or certificate of appointment.  All grand and petit jurors in said Territory shall take the same oath or affirmation to be administered, in writing or orally, in the proper court.  No person shall be entitled to vote in any election in said Territory who shall not have taken the oath or affirmation aforesaid.  No person who shall have been convicted of any crime under this act, or under the act of Congress aforesaid approved March twenty-second, eighteen hundred and eighty-two, or who shall be a polygamist, or who shall associate or cohabit polygamously with persons of the other sex, shall be entitled to vote in any election in said Territory, or be capable of jury service, or to hold any office of trust or emolument in said Territory.

     Sec. 25.  That the office of Territorial superintendent of district schools created by the laws of Utah is hereby abolished; and it shall be the duty of the supreme court of said Territory to appoint a commissioner of schools, who shall possess and exercise all the powers and duties heretofore imposed by the laws of said Territory upon the Territorial superintendent of district schools, and who shall receive the same salary and compensation, which shall be paid out of the treasury of said Territory; and the laws of the Territory of Utah providing for the method of election and appointment of such Territorial superintendent of district schools are hereby suspended until the further action of Congress shall be had in respect thereto.  The said superintendent shall have power to prohibit the use in any district school of any book of a sectarian character or otherwise unsuitable.  Said superintendent shall collect and classify statistics and other information respecting the district and other schools in said Territory, showing their progress, the whole number of children of school age, the number who attend school in each year in respective counties, the average length of time of their attendance, the number of teachers who are Mormons, the number who are so-called gentiles, the number of children of Mormon parents and the number of children of so-called gentile parents, and their respective average attendance at school; all of which statistics and information shall be annually reported to Congress, through the governor of said Territory and the Department of the Interior.

      Sec. 26.  That all religious societies, sects, and congregations shall have the right to hold and hold, through trustees appointed by any court exercising probate powers in a Territory, only on the nomination of the authorities of such society, sect, or congregation, so much real property for the erection or use of houses of worship, and for such parsonages and burial grounds as shall be necessary for the convenience and use of the several congregations of such religious society, sect, or congregation.

     Sec. 27.  That all laws passed by the so-called State of Deseret and by the legislative assembly of the Territory of Utah for the organization of the militia thereof or for the creation of the Nauvoo Legion are hereby annulled, and declared of no effect; and the militia of Utah shall be organized and subjected in all respects to the laws of the United States regulating the militia in the Territories:  Provided, however, That all general officers of the militia shall be appointed by the governor of the Territory, by and with the advice and consent of the council thereof.  The legislative assembly of Utah shall have power to pass laws for organizing the militia thereof, subject to the approval of Congress.

Received by the President, February 19, 1887.

[Note by the Department of State - The foregoing act having been presented to the President of the United States for his approval, and not having been returned by him to the house of Congress in which it originated within the time prescribed by the Constitution of the United States, has become a law without his approval.]  The bill automatically became a law on March 3, 1887.