provided, and we were offered a choice | man had ever been in their town beof sleeping apartments, close inner fore, and they hoped I would excuse rooms, or the open verandah; my com- them if they proceeded in their own panions preferred the latter. I was way. He then picked up the dried conducted to a neighboring house, and fish, the trap and net, and handed found the people very kind. My bed, them to me, saying, 'Bonny and Calasmall boxes, of unequal height un- bar have ships to trade with, but Okriluckily, was in the best room, in which ka has nothing but fish. It is on fish I found a good fire, 30 kegs of powder, we live, it is with fish we buy the oil and a considerable quantity of cloth we have to sell, and this has been so and gin. I managed to sleep tolerably ever since Okrika became a country.' well, but my companions were badly It was in the creeks I saw in coming bitten by the sand-flies. A King's that they caught their fish, and Calamessenger came for us at sunrise, and | bar men came into these creeks and shortly after 7 we were seated with the stole their fish out of the nets, and King and his chiefs. King Fibia re- also robbed their canoes." Mr. Livingmarked that in Bonny the King and stone discussed with them terms of chiefs could settle public affairs, but peace, and it was finally arranged that in Okrika the people always wanted to Fibia should send down two of his be present. He thought it would be chiefs to meet the chiefs of Bonny and better to have the interview in a pub- Calabar, and settle the differences. lic place, so that his people could hear The Consul adds, "The session lasted all that was said, and not have to four hours and a half. Never before pester him with questions after we in Africa have I seen such powerfulwere gone. We accordingly adjourned looking men as the Okrika. I could to the street. There was some dis- not but admire their physical strength. turbance at first, but nothing like that As they sat before me chewing bits of of an excited political gathering in a chop-stick to clean their teeth, and civilized country. King Fibia re- gazing earnestly at me, the thought quested them to be silent, and listen occasionally flashed across my mind, to what was said. His Prime Minister Are these cannibals wondering how a and orator, having before him speci- piece of roast Consul would taste, and mens of two kinds of dried fish, a fish which would be most savory, cold trap, and piece of net, commenced by Consul or hot?' On parting, Fibia remarking that they were glad to see made me a present of about a cartload me. They did not understand the of gigantic yams, two goats, and a customs of the white men; no white fowl. AN OUTRAGE. (From the Salt Lake Daily Telegraph, March 7th & 9th, 1867.) The House Judiciary Committee have denounced the Memorial of the Legislature of Utah, asking Congress to repeal the anti-polygamy law, as an "outrage" of the greatest kind. Of course we are very sorry that the distinguished gentlemen composing the Judiciary Committee saw in that light the petition in question. We regret that those gentlemen should think so meanly of the Legislature of this Territory, as to conclude that it had deliberately and intentionally, or even carelessly, perpetrated an outrage of the gross character represented, or, indeed, any kind of outrage upon the assembled wisdom of the nation. It is possible that the committee have misjudged the designs and intentions of our Legislature, and the nature of the spirit that actuated it, in presenting that petition to Congress. It is even possible that the committee have misjudged the real nature of the memorial itself, or rather of the subject which is the burden of that memorial. We are somewhat inclined to think that such is the fact, and acquainted 262 THE MARRIAGE RELATION. as we are with the members of the Utah Legislature, all of them to some extent, many of them very well, and the principal of them intimately, we must be permitted to say, in their behalf, that we are perfectly satisfied that they had not the slightest intention of outraging the feelings of Congress, had not the most distant idea of doing any such thing, are totally incapable of such intention. The members of the Utah Legislature are honorable and upright men, of decided and strong convictions, earnest in maintaining those convictions, and conscientious in developing them. We are certain that the perpetration of outrages against any man or woman, or body of men or women, is not one of the reasons for their assembling in our Legislative halls, but is entirely foreign to their motives and dispositions. But of what could this "outrage" consist? Was it the act of presenting a memorial to Congress ? That could hardly be. We are aware that some curiously constructed personages contend that the people of the Territories have no political rights, consequently have not the right of petition, and that some more curiously constructed personages contend that the people of Utah have no rights of any kind, but we would be very loth to outrage Congress by supposing that it contended for any such despotic notions. Therefore, we cannot begin to presume that the " outrage" complained of by the Judiciary Committee was the act of the Utah Legislature in forwarding a memorial to Congress. If the Utah Legislature has no right to memorialize Congress, we hope that body will say so plainly. outrage" consisted in asking some thing offensive to Congress. Does the right of petition forbid the asking for anything that is offensive to Congress, or make such asking an outrage? We do not so understand it. Congress is pleased to make a law to the injury of the citizens of a particular community, or of a majority of the citizens of the whole Union. The representatives of the injured citizens respectfully ask for the repeal of the obnoxious law. How can that be reasonably considered an outrage? It looks to us like the exercise of an inalienable right. Let us come down to the immediate facts in the case. Congress passed a law prohibiting polygamy in the Territories. This law was made with especial reference to Utah. The people of Utah conscientiously regard the above law as peculiarly obnoxious, as unconstitutional, as inimical to morality and religion, and to the real welfare of the country. In accordance with those conscientious convictions, the Legislature of Utah respectfully, but earnestly memorialized Congress to repeal the obnoxious law, believing that its operation, if effective, would be evil, enormously evil, and that only. How that action of our Legislature could be construed into an "outrage," we fail to see. There is nothing in the right of petition which makes it outrageous to ask anything which Congress may not see fit to grant. On the contrary, the right of petition pre-supposes that such things would be chiefly asked. If Congress and the people invariably saw and understood exactly alike, there would be no need of petitions, for Congress would invariably legislate to the full Next, was the memorial respectfully and perfect satisfaction of the people, worded? We thought it was. We without being asked to do it. If Conhave heard no person, even the bitter- gress does not see fit to grant what est enemy of the people of Utah, com- citizens who feel themselves unjustly plain that the memorial was disrespect- borne upon by Congressional enactful in language, and we cannot think it ment, ask why so it is, but how asking was. If such, however, was the case, Congress to repeal an obnoxions law we trust the Committee will so signify, can be an outrage, is a mystery to us. and we think that our Legislature, Would the Committee be good enough next session, would endeavor to get up to explain? and forward another memorial on the same subject, faultless in this respect if possible. The words of the Committee would lead us to conclude that the alleged THE MARRIAGE RELATION. The House Judiciary Committee denounced polygamy as subversive of the marriage relation. That is a novel THE MARRIAGE RELATION. assertion against polygamy, and to us appears susceptible of no reasonable argumentative support. We say this without intending any disrespect to the distinguished gentlemen who composed that committee, but simply as our estimate of the intrinsic value of the assertion. It may be that our estimate is erroneous, but we do not think it is. It may be that the Judiciary Committee were right in that characterization of polygamy, and that we are wrong in our views of that interesting institution, but we do not think we are wrong. If we are wrong, then we shall be pleased to be convinced of it, and we will thank any person who is able to, and will so convince us. We want to be right, and we mean to get right, if we are not now on that track, though we think we are. For how in the world polygamy, which is plural marriage, can be subversive of marriage, is a profound enigma to us. What is marriage? It is the union of man and woman by divine appointment and authority, and according to divine law. We presume that there will be no controversy on the question that marriage was of divine ordination. Such is the universal belief in Christendom, though that alone would not be sufficient authority. The next thing to be considered is -is any kind of authority necessary to the administration of marriage? The universal opinion and practice show, and show truly, that proper authority is considered essential to the solemnization of marriage. What then, is the proper authority? Marriage is not an ordinance of human origin, therefore human authority is not sufficient to administer in that ordinance Marriage, as we have said, is an ordinance of divine origin, therefore divine authority is necessary to its performance. It consequently follows, that all marriages performed by divine authority are valid, and also that all union of the sexes by merely human authority is not marriage. This may be thought a startling proposition, but it is truth. The ceremony attending the union of a man and a woman may be administered with much pomp and circumstance, and in perfect accordance with merely human laws, but it is not marriage. 263 Call such union by what name you please, still it is not marriage, for marriage can be accomplished only by divine authority. It may be asked"What do we term the union of the sexes by human authority?" To which we reply, it is not our business to invent a name for such a ceremony. Let those who invented the ceremony also invent a fitting name for it. simply say, it is not marriage. As for us, we find plenty to do to furnish names for our own numerous offspring. We The question now arises-" In the absence of divine authority, which is best, to disobey the commandment to increase and multiply, or to obey it with no more ceremonial sanction than that of merely human laws?" Most humans would prefer the latter horn of the dilemma, and we are not inclined to blame them. Indeed, in view of the fact that the first great commandment has never been revoked, and the other fact, that if it were not obeyed the human race would soon come to an end in this mortal sphere, we really think that, under the circumstances named, we should commit the last named of the two sins, and boldly face the consequences. The blame, however, comes in, when divine authority has been established on the earth, and man and woman sexually unite without that authority. We may further add that much of the present generation are in danger of that blame. The people of Utah rightly contend that marriage requires divine authority, and that divine sanction has been given most decidedly to polygamy, the marriage of more than one woman to one man. How can this be subversive of marriage, those who so charge should prove, on them rests the burden of proof-a more than Herculean burden. For Moses, the great prototype of Legislators, legislated in favor of polygamy, and that by divine authority. Long before his day Abraham entered into the polygamous form of marriage. The Savior of the world himself descended from a long and illustrious line of polygamists, or, as the Judiciary Committee and modern Christians would make out, a long and notorious line of adulterers and bastards. Through the whole Bible there cannot be found the first sentence THE departure of Elder Orson Pratt is noticed in another column of this STAR, and while we rejoice that he is about to join his family and numerous friends in Zion, we deplore the loss which the Saints in this country will experience, both from his teachings orally, and through the columns of this periodical. But what is our loss will be his infinite gain; and as the Lord has provided for His sheep, other shepherds will arise, who will feed the flock with the bread of eternal life. Elder Pratt left his home on the 7th of May, 1864, reached New York, via San Francisco and the Isthmus of Panama, thence to England, and arrived at the port of Liverpool in July of the same year. For several months he labored under the direction of President Daniel H. Wells, visiting the London and Birmingham Districts, preaching to large audiences of Saints and strangers, lifting up his voice as with a trump, and declaring the revelations of Jehovah. "Woe, woe unto this generation except they repent, saith the Lord of Hosts," are words which have often fallen from the lips of brother Pratt, and his testimony has been true and faithful, neither sparing the wealthy nor closing the door against the poor, but speaking forth the words of life, even as the Spirit gave him utterance. In January 1865, brother Pratt, accompanied by Elder W. W. Riter, took his departure for Austria. They made Vienna their head-quarters, and sought with all the power God gave them to open the Gospel door to that nation; but modern vices were so thoroughly interwoven in the social system of the Austrians, that the Gospel had but few charms for them-they preferred the jewelled casket though empty, to the leaden one which contained the priceless gem of eternal life. For seven months did these brethren seek unto the Lord for wisdom, that they might reach the hearts of the people. Although their labors were apparently ineffectual, yet the Lord accepted their testimony, and immediately after their recall, in August, a desolating war swept over that great empire, the results of which astonished the world. In ten days one of the first military powers of the earth was dismembered and broken into fragments, and six hundred thousand warriors who drew the sword in defence of this proud autocratic Government, which spurned the humble testimony of our brethren, melted like snow before the legions of her late Prussian alley. During the absence of the Editor and President, Elder Pratt presided over the European Mission, and also edited the MILLENNIAL STAR. His labors have been appreciated by his brethren in Zion, and also by the Saints in this country who have perused his most excellent articles, which are full of instruction and words of comfort to the faithful of Israel. May the blessings of God accompany him on his journey, and the angels of the Almighty bear him safely over sea and land, and we are sure this blessing will find an echo in the hearts of the faithful Saints in all the world. TO THE SAINTS IN GREAT BRITAIN. DEAR BRETHREN :-The time is near, when we expect to leave you for our mountain home in Utah, from which we have been absent about three years. During the time of our sojourn in your midst, we have experienced many happy seasons in your assemblages: we have rejoiced in beholding the manifestations of your love for the truth, and fellowship for one another: we have beheld, with gladness, your faith made manifest by works of righteousness, and acts of kindness to ourself and to our fellow-laborers in the Mission: we have heard you express your most ardent desires, to be faithful to your God and to his kingdom; and we know that you long for deliverance from the lands of the wicked, and for your future home in Zion. You have been born anew,—even of the Spirit of God,—and have been adopted into one family, and have become the sons and daughters of one parent, and are called by one name, even the name of Christ; hence, you love one another, with the pure love of God; and your affections are drawn out towards each other, desiring the welfare of all the righteous: you rejoice in your associations with the good, far more than in the associations of blood relations who reject the truth. Those who were formerly strangers, are now made nigh by ties stronger than those cemented by the natural affections only. The Gospel of the Son of God, and the Spirit of Truth, revolutionize the whole nature of man, and make him a new creature. Saints love to mingle with Saints, but they hate evil associations they are willing to forsake fathers and mothers, brothers and sisters, houses and lands, native country and the graves of their ancestors, to emigrate to a new country, and make their home in a desert, if they can only be permitted to enjoy the happy, elevated society of the children of light. Although American born, yet, during the last twenty-seven years, we have spent the most of our time in your midst, in the work of the ministry, testifying in public and in private, in your streets and in your halls, verbally and by writings, of the wonderful work which the most High God has commenced on the earth. Over thirty-six years ago the Lord God spake unto us by his own voice, and called us by name, and commanded us to go forth and cry repentance to this generation, and prepare the way before his face, and prophesy of judgments to come; and we have not been disobedient to the hea |