The Mormon puzzle, and how to solve it

by R. W. Beers

But other and more radical measures have been proposed.

By the new Edmunds Bill, which passed the Senate on January 8th, 1886, it is provided that the President of the United States shall appoint fourteen trustees to administer the property, business affairs, and operations of the Mormon Church corporation.

There is no doubt that this act strikes at the root of the political evil in Utah, for the vast wealth of the Mormon Church in the control of the priesthood is the foundation of their power. Nevertheless, the wisdom, constitutionality, and effectiveness of the act are very questionable.

In the first place, if that law could be enforced, it would open wide the door of the meanest kind of political jobbery. It is the most delicious bit of patronage to which we have been treated for a long time. Fourteen gentlemen are to be rewarded for distinguished party services by the appointment to handle Mormon money. This is a new kind of party plum, and, in my opinion, is simply infamous.

But, in the second place, there are grave doubts as to its constitutionality. It is with much hesitation that we call in question the constitutionality of an act which is fathered by so conscientious a constitutionalist as Senator Edmunds and carried by a large majority in so conservative a body as the United States Senate. From their standpoint, perhaps, it is constitutional; but from another standpoint it seems to be plainly unconstitutional. Congress is specifically prohibited from passing any law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. The Mormon Church is a religious organization, no matter how false its religion may be. The Edmunds Bill places it under the care of the Government of the United States, and provides for the administration of all its temporal affairs. Now, if this can be done respecting the Mormon Church, it can be done respecting the Catholic Church or any one of the many Protestant establishments in our land. And who can doubt that if all the vast property, real and personal, of the Catholic Church were taken possession of by the Government, and its management placed in the hands of fourteen trustees appointed by the President—who can doubt that it would prohibit materially the free exercise of that religion by its millions of communicants in this country? Clearly, then, the attempt to control the Mormon Church corporation by Government officials is contrary to the letter and spirit of the Constitution, and entirely foreign to the spirit of American institutions. If the United States once enters upon the business of administering church property, the Mormons may not be the last victims.

Besides, if Congress has the right to appoint trustees of a religious corporation in the Territories, then the State Legislatures would have the right to appoint similar trustees in the States, and there would be nothing to prevent a legislative body governed by infidels from putting all church property into secular hands, or a Protestant or a Roman Catholic legislative body from dealing in a similar manner with the trustees of churches of an opposite faith. And, therefore, we regard this proposed act to place the control of the Mormon Church property into hands antagonistic to its spirit as a most dangerous departure from American principles.

But, in the third place, the act would, in all probability, be ineffective. It is precisely what the rules of blood and iron in Germany under the inspiration of Bismarck attempted to do with the Catholic Church a few years ago. Bismarck said just what Senator Edmunds said: “We do not propose to prohibit anybody from believing in and practising the faith of the Catholic Church, but the Government of Germany intends to take charge of all its temporal affairs—to appropriate its property and administer it as we see fit to do.” But there in Germany, where the power of the Government is absolute, this was found impossible.

And if impossible there, it will be doubly so here. Very likely if this proposition should become a law, and trustees be sent into the Territory, they would find themselves mere official ornaments without anything to do, for they would find no funds of which to take possession. The Mormons say that whatever property their Church has is owned and held, just as the property of the Presbyterian or Methodist Church, by the respective congregations. Formerly its property, real and personal, was held as that of the Catholic Church is—by a trustee in trust, and administered in the same way. The President of the Church, like the bishop, was the nominal owner, but held it in trust for the various congregations or parishes; but the Mormon Church authorities have determined that the property should be held and administered by and for each respective congregational or ward organization; and so you see that if trustees were appointed they would likely find that the Mormon Church Corporation had no funds.

Along with this enactment, there is another which provides for the confiscating of the funds unlawfully gathered by the Mormon Church.

Now, this act is not open to the same constitutional objection that the preceding is. It is a legal proposal, for only $50,000 can be held by any religious organization free from taxation; but its wisdom, justice, and practicability are very doubtful.