ate Committee on Privileges and Elections. Liberty of conscience is, and will ever be, one of our most sacred liberties, but when the doctrines inculcated by a religion tend to induce the adherents of that religion to vio late, not only the dictates of decency, but the law of the land, those doctrines are the prop er subjects of investigation by judicial and semi-judicial tribunals. It is upon this theory that the Senate Committee on privi leges and elections forced unwilling answers from the lips of Joseph F. Smith. Claiming to possess powers unusual in the complement of attributes of ordinary mortals, this high priest of Mormonism displayed an inability to give categorical answers to the questions propounded to him, which would have been inexplicable in an ordinary wit ness, and would have been the cause of his being subjected to a rigid and disastrous cross-examination had be been a hostile, in stead of a friendly witness to the other side. Questioned in regard to historical facts concerning his church (facts with which there can be no doubt, he was, and is as familiar as a fox with his den), he would almost in variably qualify his answers by some such phrase as "I suppose," "I believe," "I think." Claiming that the teaching of his church, in regard to the taking of "plural"' wives was a Divine command, received by inspiration by his illustrious predecessor and relative, and that the recent manifesto prohibiting the further practice of that doctrine was received from the same source, he was unable, or un willing to explain why he relied upon the former and disregarded the latter. Less scepticism will doubtless be express ed by the average citizen concerning the "inspiration" of the latter than of the former "revelation" concerning "plural" marriages. Senator Bailey voiced a popular sentiment when he remarked during one of the sessions: "For my part I don't have much faith in a doctrine that doesn't get a revelation com

manding a change of conduct until there is a statute compelling it." It is a singular and significant circum stance that, although the doctrine of plural marriages is not compulsory, no monogamist has ever occupied the office of "President" of the Mormon Church. Seated beside his fellow "apostles" is the cause of this investigation. Tall, raw-boned, broad-shouldered, Reed Smoot has the ap pearance of a master mechanic in Sunday clothes. Contrasted with such men as Sen ators Burrows, Hoar, Foraker, Depew and Dubois, he gives one the impression of being out of his class. Up to the present writing he has taken little, if any, part in the proceed ings. He sits quietly behind his counsel, following closely such citations as are taken from those standard works of Mormonism, which have been introduced in evidence. What effect this investigation will have upon the status of Reed Smoot as a member of the Senate of the United States cannot be predicted, but whatever the result in this respect the legislative eyes of the body politic have been directed to a sore upon its person which requires prompt and heroic treatment. It is an occasion for the applica tion of that injunction "physician heal thy self." The jury in the case of the United States t1. August W. Machen, ci cd. did not share the doubt expressed by Mr. Conrad as to the guilt of Samuel Groff, and brought in a verdict of guilty against all of the defend ants. The opinion of the Court evidently co incided with that of the jury, for the motions for a new trial were overruled and the ex treme penalty of the law imposed upon each defendant. The appeal, which had been noted to the Court of Appeals may be heard before the summer recess, but this does not seem probable. ANDREW V. BRAIUEY.