Hide Article Text (OCR)
i’S NEWSPAPERSeptember 17, IggaCHARGE OF DISTURBING A MORMON j . CONGREGATION.On Wednesday, at the Middlesex. Sessions, Andrew Hepburn, 39, a respectable-looking man, described as well-educated, was indicted for a misdemeanour in haying wilfully and maliciously disturbed a certain number of persons who had assembled for the purpose of religious worship at a place duly registered according to the statute.Counsel, in opening the case, said he was instructed on the part of a congregation of persons calling themselves “ The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints,” and the prosecution was somewhat of importance. He trusted, whatever the nature of the instructions of his learned friend who appeared on behalf of the defendant might be, the proceedings would not be treated with any degree of levity. The charge against the defendant was that he had taken an active part—‘whether from conscientious motives or otherwise, it would be for the jury to decide—in disturbing a congregation of Mormons who had assembled for worship in a building certified for the purpose, situate No. 41, Globe-road, Stepney. They were aware of the struggles which in former times all denominations of Christians had undergone to secure freedom and liberty in their forms of worship, the result of which, battling with persecution and intolerance, had been that they were now arrived at a time when every man was at liberty to worship God as his conscience dictated to him. By the law of England any man who chose to preach new doctrines of religion could take a room or a shed, and having obtained the license prescribed by the statute could legally assemble a congregation of perso.is, who could there worship in any form they chose to adopt. The sect to which the prosdeutor, Mr. Marsden, belonged, he believed adopted the Bib9e as the basis of their faith, but whatever inferences they drew, whether they were er were not at variance from those drawn by other sects of Christians, that question, he apprehended, would have not the least to do with the present prosecution. The defendant, whatever his motives might have been, bad no right to interfere with any body or community of persons who had assembled for the worship of their Creator, no matter how absurd and ridiculous the form of that worship might be.James Marsden examined: I am a preacher and teacher of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. There is a Book of Mormon. We have a licensed room, No. 41, Globe-road, Stepney. It is licensed in the name of Mr. Garrison. I know the defendant, he is a lecturer. There was public worship in the church on the 25th of August The service consisted of prayers and a sermon. We believe in the sacredness of the Scriptures, and the divinity of Christ, but we draw certain inferences which are drawn by no other sect While I was preaching on the 25th of August, the defendant entered, and in a loud voice said 11 What is the text?” He was requested to be quiet by Mr. Harrison, an elder, but he would not, and again calle'd out “ What is the passage?” “ Wbat is the Scripture?” The defendant was standing. He came in alone, and had a book in his hand. When the police interposed, and were about to remove him, several persons interfered in his behalf. I asked the deacon to call the police as I could not proceed with the discourse. We pay two guineas a quarter for the use of the room.Counsel (reading from the Book of Mormon): “We believe that governments were instituted of God for the benefit of man, and that he helds men accountable for their acts in relation to them, either in making laws or administering them for the good and safety of society. 2. We believe that no government can exist in peace except such laws are framed and held inviolate as will secure to each individual the free exercise of conscience, the right and control of property, and the protection of life.” (To the witness) : Are these two cardinal points ef your religion as to government.Witness : Yes sir, they are.Cross-examined by Mr. Payne (who was for the defence) : We believe in the divinity of the Saviour, and also in the authenticity, of the Scriptures. We believe equally in the inspiration and authenticity of the Book of Mormon—that it was a divine revelation to Joseph Smith, and is equally inspired with the Bible, and a§ authentic as the word of God.Counsel, interposing, said this court was net the proper arena for discussion of questions of this kind. They had nothing to do with this charge.Mr. Payne thought they had. The prosecutors had brought the case here instead of quietly answering the question as to what the text was which was being preached from. They had sought a public inquiry, and these things must be looked into. (To witness): Is not plurality of wives recegnized by your religion ?Witness: Not in England.Mr. Bodkin thought it would be better that this line of cross-examination should not be gone on with.Mr. Payne would show that it was quite relevant to these. (To the witness)—Is it not stated in your books that further information mav be had at all your religious meetings throughout the world ?Witness: Yes; but such information is t© be had in preaching, not in noisy discussion. If there is no information to be gathered from preaching, then where is the use of preaching ?The witness, in cross-examination : We believe that the Almighty, through the instrumentality of the elder3 of our church, effects miraculous cures. There was such a place as the temple of Nauvoo. The head of the sect does not represent the Almighty being, and go through the ceremony of pretending to create a woman from the rib of a man. Brigham Young does not do this. Such things have been stated ; but it was also stated that Christ was a blas-Mr. Payne: Do not the Latter Day Saints declare, as part of their belief, that all other sects are corrupt, and teach false doctrine, and that a new revelation was necessary, which revelation was made to Joe Smith ?Witness : They believe that there was a departure from true apostolic doctrine and from apostolic institutions, and therefore that a new religious organisation was necessary. The new revelation was given to Joseph Smith, who was deliberately murdered in America.Mr. Payne : Is it not part of your belief that the bishops of the English or Protestant church must come to Joseph Smith's church, as the only true one, in order to be saved ?Witness: It is just as reasonable to believe that as to believe that Joseph Smith’s church must come over to the bishops, in order that they may be saved.Counsel said there were a great many questions of faith in the church of England itself, and if Dr. Pusey himself were in the witness-box no doubt a smile could be elicited from his cross-examination. A man, as far as he could see, might be just as able to preach religion, even if he had not been educated at Oxford or Cambridge, as if he had.Witness, in continuation : I have heard of a book called “ An Exposure of the Proceedings and Improprieties of the Mormons.”Re-examined: Those are the calumnies of those who assail our religion. Joseph Smith was cruelly and bar-b irously murdered in America because of the religion he professed.By Mr. Bodkin: We consider ourselves Protestant dissenters.James Harrison : I belong to the church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, commonly called Mormons. I was present for religious worship at the room in the Globe-road on the 25th of August, at half-past eight. I saw the defendant come in. He stood and asked “ What is the passage ?” He asked more than once, and sufficiently loud to disturb the proceedings. His manner was excited. There were about 150 persons there. The meeting was peaceable until it was disturbed by the defendant. I called in the police, but repeatedly requested the defendant to quit before doing so. Mr. Marsden was preaching and was interrupted. I and the minister of the place, Mr. Marsden, sent for the police. They came and removed the defendant. I saw him there the previous week. On that occasion he interrupted the meeting. The meeting was broke up, and he was removed by the police. He then threatened that he would annoy the Mormons whenever and wherever he cuuld, and it was then stated that he would be there on the following Friday, the 25th, to annoy the meeting. He did come, with the result I have mentioned.Cross examined: It was on a Friday evening, and the congregation comprised young, old, and middlifgsd.the fellowship of the church. Outside the room it was written up—“Latter-day Saints’ Lecture-halL Thev never had any discussions there.Edward Sheridan,' 235 K, deposed : He was sent by his inspector to protect this body of persons at worship.' He saw the defendant go in. He had a book and a written document in his hand. He was talking and the clamour was very great. His voice was much the loudest He was requested to remove him, and asked him to be qui -t and not interrupt the meeting. He answered that he had proofs in his hand of what he was to do, and witness asked him what proof he had of his right to disturb the congregation. He persisted, and witness told him he must take him into custody. Two other officers came up and he secured. He struggled violently, and several persons who were acting with him inside said they (the police) should not lay hands on him.Cross-examined: He wa3 not told at the time that th» defendant had a dislocated shoulder, but the defendant told him so since.Joseph Buckingham stated that he was a clerk in the office of the registry of the diocese ef London. A room at 41, Globe-road, was duly licensed as a place for meeting of Protestant dissenters. The certificate was dated 7th June, 1850. It was granted to a Mr. Powell, and was signed bv the deputy-registrar. (It was produced.)Cross-examined: Could not say whether there was any preliminary investigation as to the religious tenets of -ha congregations to assemble in the places proposed to be licensed.Mr. Payne, in addressing the jury, said he was one of those whogreatly rejoiced at the amount of religious freedom and liberty of conscience enjoyed by the people of this country, but still he thought pernicious effects would result from a matter-of-course sort of registration of th.ese places of worship, without a preliminary inquiry into the tends and professions of those by whom such places were to be used. Now the place in question, this 41, Glebe-road, was licensed as a place ef meeting for Protestant dissenters; n. t a word was there about Mormonism or Latter-day Saints in the bishop’s certificate : and it was set forth in the indictment that the assemblage was one of Protestant dissenters, gathered together for the purpose of religious worship. He contended that the indictment was not borne out by the evidence in more respects than one. The first was this—was the congregation in question a buna assembly of Protestant dissenters, for meetings of which alone the place was licensed? Baptists, Independents, and Wesleyans were Protestant dissenters ; they each had the Bible for the foundation of their faith, differing only as to certain inferences ; they adopted the scripture as divine inspiration, but differed not so much upon matters of doctrine as of discipline; but this party—the Mormons—bad a bible of their own ; they believed that a new revelation had been made to their prophet, Joe Smith, under circumstances of the most miraculous nature, and that their bible was equal in divine inspiration and authenticity with our own. Were these persons, entertaining such doctrine, to be deemed Protestants ? and could it be supposed that the legislature ever contemplated such a sect when they threw a protection over Protestant dissenters, in the true sense of the term, in the exercise ot their religious wership ? This doctrine of the Mormons was essentially Anti-Christ; and the idea of their bible being inspired reminded him of what the native Indian said of it. He said, God made one bible, and the devil another; but the devil was so ashamed of his bible that he went and buried it, and Joseph Smith afterwards found it. He trusted the jury would not measure the matter with golden scales—that they would put a liberal construction upon the whole case, for such proceedings as those of these Mormons were not to be endured by honest Englishmen, and that for the honour of the country—of the true Protestant religion—for God's word, and as good men, they would not convict the defendant on this charge of disturbing a “ Protestant” congregation, and so subject him to a penalty of 40/., which the court had no power to mitigate.Mr. Bodkin, in summing up, said it had been truly observed^ that this court was not an arena for the discussion or considerations of questions of this kind : the absurdity, or otherwise, of any particular doctrine had nothing whatever to do with the issue they had to try. Under the Act of Parliament certain preliminaries must take place before public worship could be held, and there was a penalty provided in case these preliminaries were not properly complied with. By one of the clauses, such worship was prohibited taking place except with open doors, so that the proper authorities had the power of assuring themselves that such worship was carried on with decencv and oro-
Newspaper Details
London Reynolds Newspaper
London, Middlesex, GB
Tue, Oct 17, 1854
Page 12
Full Page
Clipped by
Familysearch
Utah, USA 04 Feb 2025
Other Publications Near London, Middlesex
Bingleys Journal
Arminian Magazine
London Daily Mail
London Stars and Stripes
London Daily Universal Register
