Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

THE UTAH DIVORCE CASE

The ' Pall Mall Gazette,' writing of the conviction of Hawkins ■; the Mormon says :—" Erom the ' New York Times' Salt Lake correspondent's report of tho trial of Hawkins the first Mormon punished for polygamy, it appears that the prosecution was instituted under a territorial statute approved by Brigham Young himself when Governor of Utah, in 1852. This statute provides that persons convicted of adultery shall be punished by imprisonment not exceeding twenty years, or by fine not exceeding 1,000 dollars, nor less than 300; or by both fine and imprisonment, at the discretion of the Court. It also provides that no prosecution for adultery can be commenced but on the complaint of the husband or wife. It is an additional proof to the many already furnished of the general contentment of the Morik.i women with their condition that, with the notorious anxiety of the Federal authorities to put this Act in force, only one wife has yet been found willing to give evidence against a husband. The defence set up by Hawkins's counsel was that the Mormon Legislature of Utah in passing this law could could not, and in fact did not, intend to prohibit polygamy, which is a cardinal dogma of their faith, resting as they believe on divine revelation; and that Hawkins, so far from being guilty of adultery, was married, according to the form of his church, to the three women with whom he lived, and openly acknowledged them to all to be his wives. As however all Mormons were deluded from the jury, this defence proved unavailing. The prisoner was found guilty, and sentenced to three Months' imprisonment and to pay a fine of 500 dollars. Notwithstanding the verdict, impartial people must ■Jitnit that the offence contemplated oj the Act was not the one of which Hawkins has been convicted, however its wording may bear the strained interpretation put upon it.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/WEST18720430.2.16

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Westport Times, Volume VI, Issue 966, 30 April 1872, Page 3

Word count
Tapeke kupu
318

THE UTAH DIVORCE CASE Westport Times, Volume VI, Issue 966, 30 April 1872, Page 3

THE UTAH DIVORCE CASE Westport Times, Volume VI, Issue 966, 30 April 1872, Page 3

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert