Opponents of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormon Church), or even those who are simply curious, tend to have two questions about the discontinuation of polygamy: why did it discontinue, and did it discontinue?  Some charge that Wilford Woodruff acted out of political expediency rather than revelation.  They charge that polygamy was discontinued so that Utah could reach statehood, and nothing more.  Or, they might charge that polygamy didn’t end after 1890, thus, the revelation was a lie and Mormons may still be practicing polygamy.

The reality is both simpler and more complex.  In short, the Manifesto of 1890 was not intended to end polygamy, but the “Second Manifesto” of 1904 was and did.  In the period between 1890 and 1904, polygamous marriages were still made and solemnized and cohabitation continued.  After 1904, this ended.  The purpose of this article is to explain the purpose of the manifestos, as well as why compliance with the government was not immediate.  The first Manifesto, for example, was political.  But it was also inspired of God.

Let’s present some context.  From the beginning, and well before the practice of polygamy, Mormons had suffered heavy persecution for their beliefs.  They had been driven from state to state.  Utah territory was the first place they had been able to settle with any permanence.  But, although they were not (quite) driven out for it, polygamy caused a national uproar that would not end.

Congressional Acts and Raids

The Morrill Act of 1862 banned polygamy and bigamy in the U.S. territories and also targeted the property of the Church with the clause that no religious corporation could have holdings totaling more than fifty thousand in value.  The Congressmen would later assure the Catholic Church that the ruling did not apply to them: the LDS Church was the sole target.  Still, the Morrill Act itself was not enforced yet—no one would be arrested or charged for polygamy.  Not yet.  But the implications were terrible.  An 1860 congressional committee had declared that "It is competent for Congress to declare any act criminal which is not sanctioned or authorized by the provisions of the Constitution."  Essentially, religious beliefs were protected under the First Amendment.  Practices, if not in the Constitution, were not, whether they caused any harm or not.  The rhetoric of the time was more virulent than the law.  Congressmen admitted openly that they intended to remove Mormonism from Utah.

And it would get worse. The Poland Act of 1874 would make the prosecution of polygamy more feasible. In 1879, Brigham Young’s secretary, George Reynold, was successfully tried for polygamy.

Then came the Edmunds Act of 1882.  This made “cohabitating with more than one woman” a crime, which was somewhat ironic, considering that many people kept mistresses at this time.  (The keeping of mistresses was, of course, not prosecuted.)  People who believed in polygamy could not try polygamists.  More seriously, polygamists and their spouses couldn’t hold any office in any territory, or even vote. 

It would get worse.  In the mid-1880s, dozens of federal marshals swept down on Idaho on Utah in what would later be called “the Raid.”  Their purpose was the arrest and prosecution of polygamists as polygamists.  By 1886, every Mormon settlement in the U.S. had been invaded by these federal marshals.  They broke into homes in the middle of the night, questioned children about their parents, and used a network of informants to determine who was a polygamist . . . or who might be, which, in many cases, was considered good enough.  Some Mormon men fled to Canada or Mexico to escape capture, but many did not.  At least one was killed in the process of arrest.

The definition of cohabitation was also dangerously loose.  The burden of proof was on the defendant.  Their wives could not be supported at all, even if they lived in separate houses.  The separation had to be complete, which was, in effect, abandonment.

The Edmunds-Tucker Act of 1887 added some further legislation against the Mormons. For example, their territorial militia was abolished, fornication and adultery became actually illegal (since polygamy was seen as either or both, or similar enough), and children born to polygamist fathers couldn’t inherit from them.

The courts were abusing their power even without additional legislation.  Some judges would try polygamists for cohabitation based on, say, year (every year lived with two wives instead of one represented a separate case), for the purpose of holding polygamists indefinitely, although this practice was eventually struck down.  When the Edmund-Tucker Act allowed spouses to testify against their husbands, some courts tried to force the women to testify, illegal as this was.

The Mormons would find that to be tried was to be convicted.  And there were many trials.  From 1871 to 1896, there were 2,500 criminal cases in the records of the Utah courts and 95 percent of these trials were held for “sexual crimes” such as fornication and adultery.  Significantly, it was mostly (if not only) polygamists who were tried for fornication or adultery—no one was much troubled with those men who had mistresses, for example.  Even so, not even in the New England of the Puritans were sexual matters enforced so heavily.

Wilford Woodruff and the First Manifesto

Wilford Woodruff became President of the Mormon Church after former President, John Taylor, died while in hiding.  Twice (once in 1887, once in 1888), Woodruff asked the Quorum if it would be best to discontinue polygamy in accordance with the law.  In both cases, they decided that the word of the Lord only could determine whether the practice of polygamy ceased.  President Woodruff would inquire of the Lord after the second time and receive a revelation not to end the practice.  The Church couldn’t change its practices due to social and legal pressures.

In May of 1890, a bill was introduced to Congress that would bar all Latter-day Saints from holding office or voting, whether they practiced polygamy or not.  By mid-May, the government was insisting that the Church renounce polygamy officially.  Since the Supreme Court had ruled the Edmunds-Tucker constitutional, the government could take all the Church’s property—even the temples.  The government had previously promised not to take these, but this promise would not be kept. 

Since temples are essential to salvation, in Mormon beliefs, this was a serious blow.  At the same time, the Utah Commission reported that Mormon leaders were still solemnizing plural marriages.  The leaders of the Church believed that they were being accused of performing these plural marriages in Utah (which they were no longer—they had stopped in 1889).  Indeed, John Taylor had decreased the overall amount of plural marriages performed, and Wilford Woodruff had likewise kept the numbers low.  The Church was on the verge of destruction nonetheless.  Thus, some Church leaders wanted to make an official statement that polygamous marriages were no longer performed in Utah.

Wilford Woodruff went to the Lord.  The Manifesto was the result.  It was not intended to end polygamy.  It was intended to protect the Church, while also protecting the doctrine of polygamy, which the Lord had not yet commanded to discontinue.  It only received the approval of a number of the apostles and was worded as “advice” rather than a commandment to the Church.  According to the process by which something becomes official doctrine in the Church (supported by all the apostles, sustained by the Church), the Manifesto was not binding.  Indeed, some leaders discussed the possibility of discarding the policy in the future.  Even people not of the Church suspected the Manifesto would not end polygamy.  A number of newspapers pointed out their dissatisfaction with the Manifesto even as it stood—seeing it as insufficient.

It was true that polygamy was severely restricted, especially in the territory, but the practice would continue for a number of years.  Although cohabitation was forbidden, this also continued, and it was not the wish of the Church that fathers and husbands should abandon their family. At times, Woodruff did present the official stance of the Church as much more forbidding than it was to the government.  But, on the whole, polygamy, privately as well as publicly, became increasingly restricted.  Certain other Church leaders, such as George Q. Cannon, took responsibility for new plural marriages.  In many cases, the Church presidents weren’t even aware of these marriages.  This would later lead to some confusion about what was allowed and what was not.

The Second Manifesto and the End of Polygamy

Under Joseph F. Smith, Mormon polygamy would end for certain.  At the beginning of his Church presidency, Smith supported the continuation of polygamy—but the entire quorum was divided on the issue.  Then, the Reed Smoot Senate hearing would bring government pressure on the Church again.  The Church turned to the Lord.

Then came the Second Manifesto in 1904.  This pointed out that the Church, itself, had not sanctioned the new marriages (technically correct) and that the punishment for further practice would be excommunication.  This was sustained and supported by all twelve apostles and by the Church.  This stood as doctrine.  The Lord had ended polygamy.

So why the misdirection?  Why would the Lord reveal things at least partly intended to deceive?  And why did Mormons fight the discontinuation of polygamy so hard in the first place?

Polygamy was always a religious principle.  The Mormons had left the United States entirely to be able to practice their religion and, yet, their beliefs made them somehow so unpopular that the government still tried to legislate them out of existence.  Although Mormons believe that they need to obey the laws of the land where they live, they were constantly put in situations where the law forbade them to act according to their conscience.  The Church never asked that polygamous marriage receive legal backing—they only asked to be left alone.  When they were not left alone, they practiced civil disobedience for as long as they were able.  As the government was rather frank about its intention to destroy them as a religion, that they were not wholly honest with it should not be surprising.  It was most arguably unconstitutional for a religion to be so hounded as the Mormons were (losing their right to vote, even?).

Honesty is important, but it is not the first and only value.  No one would argue that those who lied to protect the Jews during the Holocaust were somehow immoral.  No one would argue that God would disapprove of that kind of deception. Similarly, the Mormons were protecting their survival as a people and as a religion.

Today, however, polygamy is not practiced and those who do practice it are excommunicated.  So it has been for over one hundred years.  Today’s practitioners of polygamy are not members of the Church.

For a much more thorough treatment, visit: Polygamy, Prophets, and Prevarication