CALAMO CURRENTS.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXIII, Issue 7824, 18 December 1886, Page 1 (Supplement)

CALAMO CURRENTS.

I bead with growing interest the picturesque and gr»phio, the thoughtful and suggestive by Mr. Firth on "Our Kin Beyond the Sea." One of the pbusantest writers in New Zealand, be carries us along •jji him over snowy height and dreary lain, through wild woodlands and by smil|D g homesteads, charmed, but thinking and learning «s Wβ go. My interest deepened Mr. Firth approached the Great Salt rake, and I was longing to see one so acute in observation and so keen in insight, face to j, ce with the great sooio-religious puzzle of America. I confess my disappointment, for Mr. Firth merely dismisses the Mormons in a couple of paragraphs ; and although long residence in t)je colony must have tended to clear a naturally able mind from prejudice, his remark on the subject differs little from that of the thousand-and-one colonists who take a passing glance at the Mormons. "It i, this practice of the plurality of wives, ffhicu the United States people have fully end rightly determined t>> put down hy force oi law.' Why " rightly," Mr. Firth ? And wherein does the right consist by whioh the people of the United States attempt to interfere with the conscientious convictions „[» portion of tho community? Is anyone tat the Mormons themselves affected by this doctrine or practice of plurality of wives ? Js there any danger to the State, is there ,ny attempt on the part of the Mormone to force their system on their fellow-citizens ; is Ibere anything in this or any other portions of their doctrine or system that is a meDace to thfl good order of society? Iβ thero anything in support of tha suppression of this religious belief that cannot be adduced in tupport of all the religious persecutions of the bad old times ?

It is sincerely to be regretted that Mr. firth evidently did not give that time and rains to study Morinonhm in its home, which such an important social problem demands ; or that if he did, he did not allow himself that freedom from preconceived ideas which js necessary to arriving at unbiassed conclusions. If he had so studied it, he would have fnnnd that the Mormons are more honest th*u the rest of the people of America ; that their debts *t e invariably paid; that they are straight in all their bargainings ; that thay ire more moral than the rest of the Americans ; that the evil which is the curse of town* is unknown among them ; that they »re more temperate than other Americans, and more industrious ; and that they claim to have founded every doct-ice which they hold on the words of the Old and New Testament. A people with such a record should not be dismissed by a philosophical observer like Mr. Firth by merely dubbing their helievings as "simply the distorted imaginations of dreaming, self - deluded, risionary enthusiasts."

Mr. Firth evidently dropped across some of the weaker brethren, or they would not h»re been posed by his appeal to " » great natural law" as against the practice of polygamy. He would have been told by them that tho God of tho Bible is the God of and that in the Bible He has not only allowed polygamy but blessed it; he would have been told that our Saviour was the descendant from generations of poiygamous families, and that the valne attached to the purity of dia descent, and the seeming preservation of the tribe of Judah to give birth to the Messiah, do not seem to cast much aspersion on a social institution which Mr. Firth so contemns. He would have been told that the whole of the Old Testament ie distinctly in support of polygamy, and that in the New Testament there is no prohibition against it; ar.d he would have been asked whether in the case of a'practice sanctioned for thousands of years in the Church, if it had become wrong by a change of dispensation, there would not have been a distinct and unequivocal prohibition. I do not hesitate to say that if Mr. Firth had encountered a clever Mormon, clever as he is himself, it would have been all about the other way, and "in no casa '/ould he have been able to assail the position." The fact of the matter is, that the question of monogamy v. polygamy is not one of religion at all ; and any attempt to settle it by an appeal to the Bible ie not satisfactory—except to the upholder of tbe right to have multiple wives. Monogamy haa been just tho social system of the Western nations grafted on a religion that had its origin in the East; and as that religion gave a sacred character to marriage, it came to throw the same sanctity over the monoeamoua state of marriage, until now everybody has come, without any reason whatever, to regard the institution of multiple wivea as opposed to the tenets of religion.

I confess I am enrprised to see a man of Mr. Firth's acnteness dismissing the thing in so cavalier a fashion. That polygamy was fitted to a rude state of society, that it falls into de3netude aa society advances, ro that it becomes practically impossible when society hat reached its present eiage of advancement seems prestv clear; but that it is, or ever was, opposed to the will of God, is simple iseumptioa without a shadow of proof. Among the Mormons, it appears, that not more than one in five carries out the practice of polygamy, though they all maintain the principle ; ita practice was similarly exceptional among ancient Israel, and bo it appean to be among all polygamous people ; so that, if Mr. Firth's "natural law' , of the near equality of the soxes is applied, polygamy, iimised as it seems tu always be in practice, would not show any great divergence ; and as he appeals to the animal King- ' d'om and the equality of sexes existing, I thick he will find that very generally, by the right of might, the law of polygamy rcigna there too. This will be accepted by many as a reasoning in f&vour of introducing polygamy into oar social eystem; but the absurdity of attempting to give a religious basis to monogamy may be shown, without supposing it had no baais. Its basis is in tho clear and recogniised necessities of an advanced social eybtem. So long as woman occupies the position which she does in ottr eocial life, there is no fear of a plurality of wives. When she was a beast of burthen, and accepted her position, man could have her in duplicate or triplicate or quintuplicate if he liked, but now that we have raised her to a poeitioa little lower than the angels, we may leave the question of plurality of wives to solve itself ; and if the American Government, instead of resorting to the antiquated and useless method of burning in religious principles by persecution, had left the Mormons to tUemselvcs, polygamy would have died out long ago. •i he Mormons believo that polygamy is according to Scripture ; they say that the difference between them and other American citizens and Britishers is, that they have multiple wives and are married to them, but other people have multiple wives but are i ot married to them; their action, they eay, is baaed on religion aud principle, other people do the same in violation of tbeir own views of religion and principle, and yet American law frowns on Mormons, and leaves similar but more irregular practices to go on in hundreds of thousands of cases unchecked,

Aβ a matter of fair play as between man and man, and as a matter of the dispensation of juttice, the law is manifestly unequal, and yet so clear an intellect as that of Mr, J. C. Firth gays th»t"the United States people haTe fully and rightly determined to put polygamy down by force of law." The law, if it cioeu not allow, winks at unlimited and unlicensed concubinage, bat it eenda to gaol, *nd rightly according to Mr. Firth, who marry wives according to ancient Scriptural usage and authority, »nd who know that in doing ao they are doiDg no violence to morals as ordained by ll >e God of nature and, revelation. This wnduct of the American Government is la <npant hypocrisy to begin with ; it is un"iruees in dealing between man and man; f»d, in violation of the American constitution, " is the greatest puraecution of men and *omea for their religious belief, and a picked violation of the rights of conscience. lI «re then this, it is folly, because by secret "fringes these Mormons can evade the law, • n d while entering secretly into the bonds of Wjrgamous marriage within the recesses of temple, thev' ,:a,l P ut on the * P " P*»rance to th* 'outside world of liv- ■« toother a life of conoubuuge

and immorality, and so fulfil the very moderate requirement? of American law. Iα persecuting the Mormons, the Auierioan Government are doing what persecution commonly has done in every age—confirming them in their steadfastness ; and, while desiring to suppress polygamy, they are burnin" it as a principle into their religious nature; and a practice which is alien to the spirit of the age, and a;<aiust which the natural instincts of all the women of Utah would be at war if they were left to themsolvns. is invested with a sacrednoss and a binding obligation that it never knew before. And yet Mr. Firth says it.is rightly done. POLLEX.