1886-09-06-Millennial Star-A Meddling Official

A Meddling Official

Millennial Star, v48 n36, 6 Sept 1886, p. 568.

THERE is in New York a governmental Board of Commissioners of Emigration, whose duty it is to see that all laws and regulations pertaining to that business are duly honored and enforced. Prominent among these laws is one to prevent the landing of foreign paupers, idiots, convicts and persons likely to become a public charge. It can readily be seen that great difficulties attend the practical operation of such a law, good as it may be in theory and intent, and, as a matter of fact, it is not systematically enforced. .

There are no people to whom this law has less application than “Mormon” emigrants. Our system of emigration and the character of our people who emigrate have been so long before the world in the light of publicity that they are very generally understood, and we have no fear of contradiction from any well-informed, fair minded person when we assert that for intelligence, cleanliness, good order, and freedom from all probability of ever becoming public charges or burdens, our emigrants are at least fully up to the average. But notwithstanding these well known and generally admitted facts, it appears that Mr. Edmund Stephenson, a member of the Board of Emigration Commissioners, has repeatedly endeavored to obstruct the landing of “Mormon” emigrants in New York, claiming that this law, which prohibits the landing of improper persons, has application to them. However, he has always been overruled by his fellow-Commissioners, who are more highly endowed with common sense than himself. His greatest attempt at obstruction seems to have been made against our third, or June company, which, as our readers will remember, was put to some inconvenience through his officiousness. Being, as usual, overruled by the other members of the Board he addressed a letter, on the 15th of July, and which was published on the 1st ult., to Acting Secretary Fairchild of the U. S. Treasury, and says in it, in reference to our June company, which, by the way, was rather numerically magnified in his eyes:

And all these 497 persons were allowed to land, as, in the opinion of the majority of the Board of Commissioners, said persons were not likely to become a “public charge,” and they were under the care of, and homes would be provided for by the church and society represented by the “Mormon Elders,” and I submit that the only evidence before the Commissioners that said persons would not become a public charge was the guarantee of a lawless community and the statements of its “Elders.”

I am this day informed at Castle Garden that there are now on their way to this port two steamships with over 700 similar Mormon immigrants on board, and that there are still more to follow; and I desire most earnestly to protest against their being allowed to land, and respectfully urge upon you the importance of this matter, and request from you instructions in time either to prevent or allow their landing. I claim and submit that the act of Congress was intended to and does prevent the landing of any and all persons to this country for the purpose and with the intent of aiding and abetting in the violation of the law of God and of the statutes of these United States, and more especially where such persons, as in the case of those landed from the Nevada, have no means of support save as they derive the same by or through the Church of the Latter-day Saints.

The animus of the gentleman is easily seen in his wholesale charge that the "Mormons” are a lawless community, when it is well known that with the exception of a law of more than doubtful constitutionality, and which was specially enacted against a religious principle, the laws of the United States are nowhere more honored than by the Latter-day Saints in Utah.

Several New York papers, in commenting upon the wild assertions of Mr. Stephenson, point out the absurdity of his assumption that the “Mormon” emigrants are intending to violate the law of God and the statutes of the United States. A Board of Emigration Commissioners will need to be composed of men possessing more than human powers if they are to sit in judgment upon the intentions of emigrants entering the port of New York. Unless a man avows his intentions they are commonly supposed to be known only to himself and his God, until he manifests them by his consequent acts. To make Mr. Stephenson's course consistent, the law must be amended to read: “All emigrants intending to become convicts shall be excluded from the port of New York, and Mr. Stephenson is authorized to determine who have such intentions.”

But Mr. Stephenson seems also to have a fear that the “Mormons” are intending to violate the law of God as well as the statutes of the United States. This assertion is very evidently aimed at the principle of plural marriage, which is a part of our religion. He also professes to have a fear that the "Mormon" emigrants, through their poverty, may become a public charge to the United States. The New York Sun, a leading American paper, thus meets these questions.

“In a letter to the Acting Secretary of the Treasury, Mr. Edward Stephenson, of our Emigration Commission, takes the ground that the Commissioners are authorized by law to prevent the landing of the hordes of Mormon converts who come to this port. The law to which he refers is that of August 3, 1882, and shuts out from our shores 'any person unable to take care of himself or herself without becoming a public charge.'

It seems that on the 7th of last month (July) the steamship Nevada arrived at New York from Liverpool with 497 such converts, who were allowed to land, because in the opinion of the majority of the Emigration Commissioners they were not likely to become a public charge, since they were in the care of "Mormon Elders,” who had undertaken to provide homes for them. Mr. Stephenson holds that this decision was wrong, inasmuch as “the only evidence before the Commissioners that said persons would not become a public charge was the guarantee of a lawless community, and the statements of its Elders." Two other steamers, bringing more than one thousand additional Mormon converts, were daily expected at the date of his letter, July 15th, and he therefore protested to the Acting Secretary against the course adopted by the Commissioners with respect to such immigrants.

It is very plain that the majority of the Commissioners are supported by a common-sense interpretation of the law, and that Mr. Stephenson is all wrong as to his head, however right he may be as to his heart." Everybody knows that the imported Mormons will not become a public charge, but will speedily be put in the way of supporting themselves and furnishing tribute to the Mormon Church, no matter how poor in purse they may be on their arrival. They are not paupers, and they do not come here for the purpose of subsisting at the public expense. But we shall not undertake to argue that point, for it seems to us quite evident that such immigrants do not come within the proscription of the act, which applies to paupers and so-called assisted emigrants,” who are sent over to occupy our poor houses.

What we wish to refer to is a further remark of Mr. Stephenson when he speaks of Mormonism, or, more specifically, polygamy, as being “in violation of the law of God and of the statutes of these United States."

Now, polygamy is undoubtedly forbidden by our law, but when Mr. Stephenson declares that it is contrary to the law of God, what does he mean? It was not in violation of the Mosaic law, and was commonly practiced by the Old Testament patriarchs. There are no positive injunctions against the practice in the Bible. Jesus says nothing on the subject, and yet polygamy still existed among the Jews of His day, though it had fallen in pretty general disuse. St. Paul, in his first epistle to Timothy, seems, by implication, to countenance polygamy when he says: A bishop, then, must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behavior, given to hospitality, apt to teach.” The Christian converts over whom the Apostle exercised such careful supervision were often, as we well know, taken from among people who practiced polygamy; and in recent times Bishop Colenso, in Africa, and missionaries of different Protestant denominations in India have deemed it expedient to allow heathen polygamists to retain their wives after baptism. They may keep those they have, but the converts must take po more wives; and the exception is defended on the ground that it would be cruel to break up family relations already established. It is plain, therefore, that these missionaries do not look upon polygamy as in violation of the law of God, else it would be their duty to absolutely forbid the practice at any cost.

It is evident that Mr. Stephenson has a very limited understanding of the law of God, and from the strained interpretation he is giving the United States statutes, we think his comprehension of their spirit and intent is not much better. We do not know what instructions he will receive from the Treasury department, but the instruction he seems to be most in need of is that afforded by a piece of sound, practical advice, known as the “Mormon" creed: “Mind your own business.” The statement that two steamboats were daily expected with 700 or 1,000 "Mormon" emigrants will be interesting news to our readers. Strange it is that when the “Mormons” form the topic of consideration, people seem to be seized with the spirit of the boy who magnified “our cat and another” into a thousand.

G. O.