The case of the officers of the Deseret Hospital versus Dr. Ellen B.
Ferguson was heard before the High Council of the Salt Lake Stake of
Zion, on the 20th of February, 1884, and a decision was rendered
therein by President Angus M. Cannon. President John Taylor on that
occasion, made lengthy remarks which were applicable to the case in
question, and upon the general principles of justice. The request has
been made that they should be published, as they would be of
benefit for the guidance of other High Councils. For this reason, his
remarks and the proceedings in the case are now published. Mr.
President and Members of the High Council:
I listened with a good deal of interest to a trial that you had before
you, yesterday and the day before, in which there were certain
principles developed that I thought it might be necessary and
advantageous to reflect upon, and to give you some of my views
thereon.
I should have been pleased to have done this had there been time when
the High Council was before in session; but I thought as I had not
then an opportunity I would take the opportunity tonight, this
meeting having been convened for that purpose.
There are a great many principles underlying the subject that was
presented before you, and acting as you are in the capacity of a High
Council, and having many cases to adjust, I thought it might be proper
to touch upon some of the leading principles pertaining to government,
rule, authority, dominion, the conflict of opinion, the necessity of
being prepared to act wisely, prudently and intelligently, and to
discriminate between right and wrong: so that upon general principles
we might be able to comprehend things that would be calculated, in
many instances, to help us to avoid a great deal of difficulty. I have
been very much hurried for time today, or I would have liked to have
had some of my views prepared. As it is, I have had a few items put
down very hastily, and I will get Brother George Reynolds to read what
I have stated on this subject.
I made a few remarks at the conclusion of the investigation you have
had here. I call it an investi gation; for I think it was more an
investigation than a trial.
The investigation was instituted to find out the true status of
certain things whereby injury had been received by certain parties,
and, on reflecting further upon the subject, I have had some leading
items put down, which, as I have said, Brother Reynolds will read,
after which I will make some remarks.
I speak of these things before Brother Reynolds reads my views,
otherwise the attitude that I take might seem strange to you.
In the few remarks I made before the High Council, at the conclusion
of the investigation, I stated that I was pleased to see the harmony
and unity, the kindly feelings, care and anxiety that you manifested
to all parties, both for and against, with a view to arriving at a
just conclusion in relation to this matter. I also spoke of the Board
of Directors of the Hospital, stating that they also had done as near
right as they knew how. Then I spoke of the accusers of the party in
question—Sister Ferguson—and I thought that although there were some
errors associated with the action taken, that they were quite sincere
in their intention to correct a supposed evil, and I would not except
Sister Ferguson from the same rule, and the question is, with such a
diversity of opinion, with so much commotion in existence, with so
many severe charges being made, how it is possible for all to be
right, and yet all acted upon principles that they conceived to be
right; but which were in many respects incorrect. This I may explain
more fully hereafter; and it is for this purpose that I wish to talk a
little to lay my views more fully before you.
Brother George Reynolds then read as follows;
I. The care, justice, equity and proper deference to all manifested by
the High Council.
II. The care and zeal manifested by the Directors, the President and
associates in the interests of the Institution—the Deseret Hospital.
III. The zeal, energy and competency of the resident surgeon, as
vouched for by the testimony of other eminent physicians.
IV. The diligence and zeal manifested by the matron and the
assistants.
Whence then originates this difficulty; these hard feelings, sayings
and doings, this bitterness, acrimony and ostracism?
These arise partly from misunderstanding, partly from ignorance, and
partly from a misconception of law, order, precedence and
jurisdiction, with probably the best possible motives. It will be
found on a careful examination of this subject that there is a great
principle involved that affects in some respects all institutions,
associations and nations.
Among the nations of the earth there are various forms of government.
There are what are called absolute monarchies—such as Russia, Turkey,
China, Persia, Morocco and others; then there are limited monarchies,
such as England, Denmark, Sweden, Italy, Greece, Portugal and others;
these are governments which are called representative, having a
monarchy, but that monarchy partially under the power of the
representative of the people. There is another species of government
which is called oligarchical, which is under the direction of
notables, who manipulate the affairs of the country for the benefit of
the people. Then there is what is called the republican form of
government, such as the United States, France, Switzerland, Mexico,
and the South American Republics and others. These are supposed to be
governed by the people and are said to be "governments of the people,
for the people and by the people," their general motto being Vox
populi, vox Dei, or the voice of the people is the voice of God. These
governments assume different phases according to the nature of the
government, varying from absolute despotism, wherein the will of one
man governs the whole, to that of the freest and fullest and most
unrestricted will of the people; and to prevent usurpations in the
republican forms of government, as well as in some of the limited
monarchies, constitutions are introduced and subscribed to, which are
an agreement or compact between the rulers and the people, or the
governors and the governed, and such governments whether monarchical
or republican are called constitutional governments. These
constitutions prescribe the powers and authority of the various
officers in the government, and how and in what manner the several
officers of the government shall be selected, elected and qualified.
In our government, whether in a National, State, or Territorial form,
all officers, of every grade, are requested to take a solemn oath to
sustain and maintain the constitution of the United States, and of the
State, or if a Territory, the organic act of the Territory as the case
may be. If these things are not a fiction all these officers and
authorities throughout the land in every department of National, State
or Territorial government, are as much bound by their obligations and
oaths as the people are bound to be subject to all constitutional
laws, and the people are not one whit more bound to the
observance of the law than these men are bound to the observance of
the sacred and solemn covenants which they have entered into. And if
the people have given up to governors, legislatures, the judiciary and
to the officers of the law certain powers, rights and privileges, this
authority coming of or from the people, it is expected that they shall
act for and in the interests of the people; and furthermore, that
while they possess those rights ceded to them by the people, whatever
is not thus ceded and placed in the hands of their rulers is
emphatically stated to be reserved to the several States or to the
people.
There are again other branches of government among the several
nations, or States in the nations, as well as in this nation; there is
martial law and civil law; also the governments of cities acting under
the directions of the authorities or legislators of the nations or of
this nation; to whom certain rights, immunities and privileges are
given in the shape of municipal regulations or of charters. But it
must be understood here in matters pertaining to our government, that
no charters or grants of any kind can be given by any parties, in
excess of the rights which they themselves possess, and that the same
obligations which vest in regard to constitutional rights and
guarantees must be observed in all those municipal regulations by the
recipients as of the grantees of those charters.
These rights and privileges in our government are formulated upon the
idea that our government is "of the people, by the people and for the
people." There are other institutions which receive more or less the
patronage and sustenance of the general, the State, and Territorial
governments, such as educational institutions, hospitals, infirmaries,
asylums, railroads, canals, steam boat lines, etc., all of which are
more or less sanctioned by law, and are more or less of a quasi public
character. These institutions generally have usages of their own, and
operate under certain stipulations specified in charters granted to
them, each having their own regulations and bylaws, as their
directors, boards of management, or other officers may dictate. These
are all subject to the common laws of nations and the usages of the
people. Then there are other laws, there are laws that pertain to the
physical world in which we live, and those that govern the sun, the
moon, and the countless stars that shine in the dome of heaven. With
all these man has nothing to do. He never has been and in the nature
of things never can be able to change what are called the laws of
nature. If any congress, parliament, or convocation was to pass a law
changing the period of the earth's revolution, or the phases of the
moon, or the rising or setting of the sun, or if all the congresses,
parliaments, or legislative bodies in the world were to unite to pass
such a law, it would be of none effect, or utterly useless, for the
simple reason that these laws are entirely independent of man's action
and outside of his control. So with the laws governing man's physical
being or that of the brute, or those natural to the animal, vegetable
and mineral kingdoms, all these are irrevocably fixed and unchangeable
so far as man is concerned. All beings, all things, from the Great
Creator to the minutest form of life are governed by the law of their
existence. The laws by which all created things fill the measure of
their existence were placed there by a superior power to that of man, and he is impotent to change or annul them. All these are
called natural laws. Then there are celestial laws, adapted and suited
to celestial beings; terrestrial laws adapted to things of the earth,
and other lower laws called telestial. As we are taught in the
Doctrine and Covenants; in all the universe there is no space where
there is no kingdom, and where there is no kingdom, there is no law;
and all things that are governed by law are preserved by law, and
sanctioned by law; also even the law or laws of the state of existence
to which they belong, be it higher or lower, much or less.
There are again celestial laws as before referred to, and terrestrial
laws, and the question arises, what is the meaning of a celestial law;
and what again is the meaning of a terrestrial law; a celestial law
pertains to the law of heaven; and is a principle by which the
intelligences in the celestial world are governed. The Gospel in its
fulness places those who obey it, under its influences, while at the
same time it does not relieve them from other obligations of a
terrestrial nature. It is said in the Doctrine and Covenants, that he
that keepeth the laws of God, hath no need to break the laws of the
land. It is further explained in section 98, what is meant in relation
to this. That all laws which are constitutional must be obeyed, as
follows:
"And now, verily I say unto you concerning the laws of the land, it is
my will that my people should observe to do all things whatsoever I
command them.
"And that the law of the land which is constitutional, supporting that
principle of freedom in maintaining rights and privileges, be longs to
all mankind, and is justifiable before me.
"Therefore, I, the Lord, justify you, and your brethren of the church, in
befriending that law which is the constitutional law of the land;
"And as pertaining to law of man, whatsoever is more or less than this,
cometh of evil."
That is taking this nation as an example, all laws that are proper and
correct, and all obligations entered into which are not violative of
the constitution should be kept inviolate. But if they are violative
of the constitution, then the compact between the rulers and the ruled
is broken and the obligation ceases to be binding. Just as a person
agreeing to purchase anything and to pay a certain amount for it, if
he receives the article bargained for, and does not pay its price, he
violates his contract; but if he does not receive the article he is
not required to pay for it. Again we ask, what is this celestial law?
The celestial law above referred to is absolute submission and
obedience to the law of God. It is exemplified in the words of Jesus,
who, when He came to introduce the Gospel said, "I came not to do my
will but the will of the Father that sent me;" and His mission was to
do the will of the Father who sent him, or to fulfill a celestial law.
And when His disciples asked Him to teach them how to pray, He said,
"When ye pray, say: Our Father, who art in heaven, hallowed be thy
name, thy kingdom come, thy will be done on earth as it is done in
heaven." This it would seem was the celestial law, or the law of the
Gospel.
Thy kingdom come. What kingdom? The kingdom of God, or the government
of God, or the rule and dominion of God, the will of God—thy will be
done on earth as it is in heaven. This seems to be the grand
leading feature of that celestial law. Connected with this are all the
blessings, rights, privileges, immunities, promises of exaltations,
promises of blessings in this world, and of exaltations, thrones and
powers in the eternal worlds; being heirs of God and joint heirs with
Jesus Christ. While such persons do not neglect the lesser duties
associated with the responsibilities of life, and do not violate any
correct principle or law, they still feel a responsibility resting
upon them to yield obedience to the mandates of Jehovah; and thus as
good citizens, loyal and patriotic to the country and its
institutions, fulfilling all just and equitable requirements, whether
civil or political. They have at the same time the same inalienable
right as men, to worship their Creator, and yield an obedience to His
laws, without infringing in anywise on the rights and privileges of
others, and that right is guaranteed to them also by the constitution
of the United States.
I have before spoken of certain associations, such as educational
establishments, cooperative institutions, hospitals, and other
organizations, which legislatures, private bodies of men, or
individuals may establish. These institutions must be governed by
their constitutions and bylaws as shall be agreed upon among
themselves. And any parties entering into those compacts, take upon
themselves the responsibilities of the conditions associated
therewith. But as in National or State affairs, these duties and
responsibilities are often very imperfectly understood; and hence in
consequence of the weakness and imperfections of men, many
misunderstandings and difficulties are liable to occur.
The case that
you have had here before the High Council is one of these cases.
The question is, how far shall rule, dominion, authority and power be
used, and how far shall mortal suasion, individual and special rights,
and a judicious and intelligent policy obtain.
It is rather a peculiar case and requires an understanding of the
position occupied by the various parties. It will be observed that
there are two usages or laws in existence—one of these would be the
general law, regulating an institution of that kind, which would be
applicable to a university, a cooperative institution, a shoe
establishment, such as we have, or any other well regulated
institution. In our cooperative institution here in the city, there
is a President and Board of Directors; they appoint the
Superintendent. He has the charge of the buying, selling, engaging, or
dismissing men, making contracts, and generally supervising and
manipulating all the affairs of the institution. The Directors would
be empowered to remove him, if thought advisable. In the University
the Board of Regency stands in the place of the Directors, and they
appoint Dr. Park as President, and he has general control of the
studies and the internal management of its affairs. In like manner,
Mrs. Ferguson held the position of resident surgeon, and is supposed
to manipulate the affairs of her department in the hospital subject to
the hospital physicians and the directory. Of course Sisters Van
Schoonhoven and Beck would be under her direction as they belong to
the medical department; while Sister McLean, being matron, would have
charge and control of the domestic arrangements. It does not appear
that any one of them was derelict in her several duties; but
that a misunderstanding had arisen between Dr. Ferguson and these
officers of the hospital, she being charged with being austere and
dictatorial in her intercourse with them, and she on the other hand
charges them with insubordination and plotting against her. Bitter
feelings and acrimonious remarks passed between them, crimination and
recrimination, until it culminated in those three ladies drawing up
specific charges of a most serious character against the resident
surgeon. These charges, it would seem, were credited by the directory
and she was requested to resign. It is evident that the directors did
this sincerely for the benefit of the institution; and to prevent a
person whom they considered incompetent, as an opium eater, a drunkard
and a thief (for these were the charges made according to their
ideas), to officiate any longer in that institution.
But here arises another phase of the matter which is this; that while
they had authority to dismiss her from the institution on these
alleged charges, they had no right to malign her private character and
reputation which it does not appear that they desired to do, but to
avoid, as far as possible. Yet these things having taken place, and
these allegations having been made on paper, and she having been
dismissed from the hospital, they leaked out without her having any
opportunity to defend herself against these statements, and her
reputation has been seriously injured; hence comes in another law—the
law of the Gospel, above referred to, or under other circumstances,
the celestial law, or what is sometimes substituted for it here, the
law of equity.
President Taylor resumed: There are very many nice points of
discrimination associated with a subject of this kind. When we talk of
law it is a very comprehensive subject, and enters into all the
ramifications of human life, and, as has been remarked, through all
nations. Generally among the governments of the world—and also among
many of the institutions referred to, there is a kind of neutral
ground, a sort of neutral zone, something similar to that which
sometimes exists between one State and another in order to prevent
collision and difficulty, and it is upon this ground that a great many
troubles and difficulties frequently exist on various matters. The
people on their part occasionally claim things that they have no right
to claim, and those who govern sometimes go beyond the bounds allotted
to them. And hence arises difficulty and trouble. Courts are appointed
generally for adjudication of these matters, and sometimes it is very
difficult for these courts to decide correctly, justly and equitably
the cases that come before them. Among the nations they are very
frequently submitted to what is termed the "arbitrament of the sword."
That, however, is a very poor thing when put into the scales of
justice. I have heard it said, for instance, when certain questions
have arisen in the United States—that is, in regard to States rights
and in regard to the rights of the people, and in regard to how far
they should be sustained in their privileges, rights, etc. I have
heard some people very flippantly say, "Oh, that has been decided by
the sword." A very singular piece of justice is a sword with which to
administer one's social, political, or national affairs. When we come
to put it in the balance of the goddess of justice—who is supposed to be blind and to hold the scales evenly—it will not stand the
test. Hence when people make this remark it shows that they are very
ignorant of the principles of jurisprudence, of the rights of man, of
the obligations that the nation sustains to its people, or the people
to the nation.
But what I wanted particularly to arrive at are the principles
associated with this case that has come up before you, and I will try
and show you why and how these difficulties have occurred between
these parties.
Sister Ferguson—who according to the evidence we have had, and from
questions presented, and remarks made—evidently is a lady of
intelligence and very well acquainted with medical affairs, and as
such she was appointed House Surgeon of the Deseret Hospital. From
this position she was removed. And here comes in a principle that I
wish to speak upon.
In this city we have a cooperative institution. I refer to it because
it is an institution with which we are all familiar. I have already
referred, in what has been read, to the nature of its organization,
and the kind of government by which it is carried on. There are quite
a number of employees in the institution—some 150 or 200. There is a
Board of Directors, and there is a president and a superintendent. The
superintendent seems to be the man upon whom rests the greatest
responsibility, and he is responsible to the directors for all his
acts. As stated already, he makes the purchases or orders them made;
he disposes of the goods, or orders them disposed of. He makes
arrangements for all its business transactions, and he reports to the
directors, monthly, the status of the institution. In his hands is
placed the power to manipulate and regulate the affairs thereof. If
some person in that institution—he may be a good man—is incompetent,
he uses his discretion in removing that man. He requires men that are
acquainted with the business that he is associated with: and although
this may be a very good man, the superintendent may think it proper,
in the interests of the institution to have him removed. He uses his
authority and has him removed because of his incompetency. The man who
is dismissed may feel aggrieved. He may think he is competent: and it
is difficult in all such circumstances to meet the wishes and views of
all these people. Hence the necessity of a wise discretion. "But,"
says the man, "I am a good Latter-day Saint." "Very well, that may be;
but, then, because you are a good Latter-day Saint, you may not be a
good blacksmith, a good carpenter, or a good shoemaker, or you may not
be—to come to their terms—a good salesman, one who comprehends the
value of goods and the wants and interests of the business."
Now, a great many questions arise out of these things, and how far
they shall go and how far they shall not. On the other hand there may
be a man who is very competent. I could refer to some of these and yet
they are not good men. "Well," says one, "we don't want such
persons
as these in our institution. Although they are competent men and well
acquainted with the business, I am afraid their example and influence
would be pernicious, and we don't want them; and we think we would
have a right to act in such a case." So they would think anywhere. The
same thing would apply to the institution I have mentioned.
Then another question arises associated with these matters, and it has
come up before you here. We have a hospital. There is an Executive
Board, which amounts to the same thing as the Board of Directors in
the other institution. Then there is a resident surgeon or physician,
and it becomes her duty to attend to certain rules and principles that
are laid down to use medical talent and ability for the benefit of the
patients and the hospital, and to manipulate certain things committed
to her charge. I suppose they have some rules associated with these
matters, although I cannot state them definitely. Sister Ferguson, it
would seem, got up a set of rules. They might be very good; I do not
know, but it would seem they were not adopted by the Board, and it
would also seem that the Board held the power in its own hands to
manipulate these affairs. So that, although the rules drawn up by
Sister Ferguson might have been very good and very advantageous if
adopted, it appears they were not.
Let me refer to another thing. Sister Ferguson received her medical
education in some medical college in the east. All such institutions,
it was stated yesterday, both in England and this country are governed
by certain rules and the general usage is that the resident physician
takes charge of and manipulates the general affairs of the
institution; and what are termed by some the inferior officers—I
merely make use of that term for want of a better one—are under the
direction of the resident physician or surgeon as the case may be.
This was Sister Ferguson's experience. Those acting in one department
had no right to interfere with the privileges belonging to others. If
these things had been specifically defined by the Board in this
Hospital, and each had known her proper duties, and each fulfilled
them, difficulty might have been averted; although according to the
evidence we had, all were very diligent and sincere in carrying out
their several duties. If a set of rules had been adopted and lived up
to, a great amount of difficulty arising out of this subject would
have been avoided between the parties, and which has more or less
involved you and I and others, and caused us to look into these
matters. Well, was there anything wrong in that? No. At the college in
which Sister Ferguson obtained her medical knowledge—and a diploma as
a mark of that knowledge or education—she also obtained a knowledge of
the rules and usages of that kind of an institution; consequently it
became almost part of her system. Is not that so, Doctor? That is the
way I understand it. Well, now, Sister Ferguson comes here and she
gets among a lot of us novices. At least I should call myself a
novice; for I have never been in any of these establishments; I have
never attended medical lectures, etc., consequently I should consider
myself a novice in these things. At the same time, independent of
this, there is a principle of rule and propriety that ought to exist
everywhere, that does exist among all the nations of the earth, and
that does exist among all those various institutions of which I have
spoken. But for want of a better knowledge of these things, I am not
surprised if, with her superior knowledge, Sister Ferguson did assume
a dictatorial air and said, when interfered with, "I do not know that
that is any of your business. I think that is mine." And then,
again, those other sisters have got their feelings on the same
question, and no law being laid down in relation to those matters,
they carry out their ideas according to their theories, and they do
not think it is proper for any kind of airs to be put on by anybody
whether rightfully or assumed. They do not comprehend that, and
neither do we, generally, in our republican institutions. It is a good
deal the same in our Church affairs. We are apt to think that "Jack is
as good as his master," and a little better. That is about the feeling
that exists. And if people should sometimes see their authority
interfered with, it creates feelings of irritation. To a person
accustomed to be governed by correct rules, and to see things carried
out intelligently, it is painful to their feelings to see them carried
out otherwise; they feel as though something was wrong and wanted
putting right.
I will relate a little circumstance of that kind; for we have all
kinds of things among us Mormons. We had a war here a while ago.
Brother Wells here was appointed a Lieut. General, and then myself and
George A. Smith were appointed his counselors—(laughter), if anybody
knows what that is in a military capacity. I never was able to find
out. Well, we went out and did the best we could, and I must say that
General Wells displayed a good deal of knowledge, tact, vim, life and
fidelity, and we tried to step up to him as near as we could—being
his counselors. (laughter.) There was a little difficulty arose about
Brother Nathaniel Jones—or Colonel Jones—a very excellent, good man,
and a thorough disciplinarian; and he had not been rubbing his back
against that medical college wall and become familiar with all its
usages, but he had been in the Nauvoo legion and an officer in the
Mormon Battalion, and there he had got a smattering of military
tactics, military ideas, military rule and authority, and when he saw
all kinds of curious doings among the boys—as they called
themselves—who were not strictly under military rule, etc., he wanted
to straighten them out. But they, like the associates of Sister
Ferguson, felt that "Jack was as good as his master." They didn't want
too much military rule; they wanted a great amount of latitude, that
they might be able to carry out their ideas and enjoy themselves and
kick up their heels and feel like a lot of wild colts. Well, General
Wells wanted me to go down, as his counselor, and see if the
difficulty could not be put right. I was not even a corporal; I don't
know what office I did hold; but he wanted me to go down and adjust
matters. So I went. I examined into things generally; talked with the
officers, and mixed up with the men, and found out how things were
exactly. There were Captains, and Colonels, and Generals, and all
kinds of big men there, and they each had men in command; but Colonel
Jones, whenever he saw anything wrong anywhere, wanted to go to work
himself and put it right. I soon found out the feeling that was
against him. The men considered him too straight-laced, and as they
expressed it, "had too many epaulets on his shoulders," because they
saw in him a disposition to exercise authority, and the officers of
the several companies did not object to that because it relieved them
from responsibility. "Now, Brother Jones" (said I)—I called him
brother; I had not got the length of calling him colonel, I called him
plain Brother Jones—"let me tell you how to fix these matters.
Such and such a man is a captain, is he not?" "Yes." "Another,
there,
is a lieutenant?" "Yes." "And another is major?"
"Yes." "And you are
in command here?" "Yes." "Well, now, instead of going to work
to
regulate all these matters yourself, why do you not detail lieutenant
so and so, captain so and so, and major so and so, to look after the
men who are acting improperly?" He thought the advice was good, and
followed it, and order and harmony were restored.
Now, this would apply to Sister Ferguson. There was nothing
particularly wrong about her; there was nothing particularly wrong
with the Board; the directors did not wish to harm Sister Ferguson;
they were simply seeking to remedy what they thought was an evil.
Now we come to another principle which is this: if in an institution
like that, without any regulations pertaining to these matters, there
was any kind of—shall we call it arbitrary feeling? I do not know that
much of that feeling was displayed. There may have been a little of
it; I do not know; but when we come down to the Gospel, which we
profess to be governed by, it places us in another position. This
Hospital was started, I believe, as an institution for the benefit of
the members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. These
sisters, I suppose, were selected because they were considered
competent, and then, on the other hand, because they were considered
good Latter-day Saints. Now, I believe that about them, and they
desired to do right, and then sister Ferguson desired to do right too.
But then there were these discrepancies exhibited. But when we come
down to the law of the Gospel, that places us altogether in another
position. And the law of the Gospel and the law of the needs of the
world do not always altogether harmonize. Sometimes we require to
exercise a good deal of forbearance, a good deal of kindness, and a
good deal of that kind of feeling expressed by the poet in speaking of
his wife:
"Be to her faults a little blind,
Be to her virtues very kind."
I have had a good deal of experience of this nature. I have to meet
with all kinds of men and all kinds of women. We are all surrounded
with a good many infirmities, and I feel as the old lady said, "we are
all poor, miserable, independent sinners." We all make egregious
mistakes sometimes when we think we are acting for the very best.
There is nothing new about that. The same thing exists in the nations.
The same thing exists among the leading men of this government and in
other governments.
Let me here refer you to a case that took place in New Orleans.
General Jackson when he was in command had some difficulty with the
mayor of that city. To make defensive works he called for cotton. One
man, I think objected, and said, "General, that is my cotton, and I
don't choose that you shall use it in this public way." "Well," said
the General, "if it is yours why don't you take your gun and help
defend it?" He ordered the cotton bales to be rolled up, and it was
necessary, as he thought, under the necessities of the case, that
military authority should be obeyed; in other words, that martial law
should be exercised. He got the cotton. He drove back the British. He
accomplished his object. And after he was done he was fined, I
believe, $1,000 for interfering with the civil authorities, and resisting the writ of habeas corpus. He thought he had a right to
do what he did, and he assumed the responsibility. But they fined him
for it, and that fine stood against him until pretty near his death.
He had transgressed the civil laws of the land, and if he could do
that with impunity, it was considered that others could do the same,
and they did not want to set such a bad example. In this we see a
conflict between military and civil authority. The mayor thought he
was doing his duty; the general thought he was doing his; but when it
was brought before the courts the general was fined. He paid the
fine, but it was remitted some little time before his death.
Then there is a case of a similar nature right before this nation at
the present time. I refer to the case of Fitz John Porter. I am not
competent to enter into the full details of it. However, suffice it to
say, that his superior officer, General Pope, had ordered him to make
a certain movement, and, it is alleged, he disobeyed the order,
thinking that if he did obey the result would be injurious. In this he
committed a breach of military etiquette and military law. They had
the law there—not like this hospital—and he violated it. For this he
was censured.
I merely want to show that there is nothing in these kinds of
misunderstanding for they exist everywhere and have existed from time
immemorial. And it is not uncommon for parties when their dignity is
insulted to settle the matter by pistols or swords, as the case may
be, and frequently one or the other is killed, and "honor is
satisfied." I merely introduce this to show how such things operate,
and that you make the very best rules you can, and the very best laws,
and there is a danger of their being violated. I might mention other
instances, but I do not wish to occupy too much time in relation to
these matters. From what I have said it will be seen that these folks,
to whom I have alluded, were pretty decent people. I do not know but
the Mayor of New Orleans was a pretty good man, and General Jackson
had a pretty good reputation, and was afterwards President of the
United States. I expect Fitz John Porter is a pretty good man; I
expect that General Pope is a pretty good man; yet they have disturbed
the nation and Congress with the difficulties that have existed
between them in spite of all those laws. As I said before there is a
kind of neutral zone, and yet men come in conflict.
Here as members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, we
profess to be governed by a law that is different from others. I have
mentioned it already. It is the law of the Gospel. Then, as has been
stated, we have our institutions separate and distinct from the
States, the same as others have. Other religious bodies have the same.
We have our religious usages, our ideas, and our theories. We
believe—and hardly I was going to say we believe in a celestial law.
Hardly. What is it? "Thy will be done on earth as it is done in
heaven." That is the way I understand it. As I have said before, Jesus
came not to do his own will, but the will of His Father that sent Him.
And when He told His disciples to pray, as I have stated, He said,
say, "Our Father which art in heaven, hallowed be thy name, thy
kingdom come," what! thy kingdom! whose kingdom? the kingdom of God.
What! The kingdom of God come upon the earth? Yes, that is what it
says—the rule of God, the govern ment of God, the dominion of
God. "Thy kingdom come, thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven."
When that is done we shall have a celestial law here. We have not got
it yet quite, and we are not prepared for it quite; but we are trying
to introduce those things, and the Gospel has been restored for that
purpose, and revelation has been given for that purpose, and the
heavens have been opened for that purpose, and the Priesthood of God
has been organized for that purpose in all its various forms and
ramifications, and predicated upon that principle, the High Council
has been organized, and other officers and peoples associated with the
Church and kingdom of God.
Now, then, as has been stated here, the Executive Board of this
hospital were desirous to be set apart by the Priesthood that they
might act under the blessing of God. They came to consult me about the
hospital in general, and wanted to know if something could not be done
in the interest of the sick and afflicted of the Church of Jesus
Christ of Latter-day Saints. They were desirous of having a house that
was dedicated to God, a house where the Elders could go in and
administer to those who were afflicted as well as the physicians, and
that all these things should be conducted under the direction of the
Almighty. Now, while I am a strict believer in discipline and rule,
yet I could not but believe, on the other hand, in the feelings that
were exhibited by Sister Eliza Snow and others, in relation to these
matters. It has appeared in this investigation that some difficulty
arose among those in charge of the hospital, and Sister Eliza and
others tried to get them to harmonize and act as Latter-day Saints.
That was very good counsel to give, and it would have been well if it
had been obeyed, but, it was not, and things have resulted as they
have done.
Now, what would you do? These sisters prayed, etc. I presume they did,
and certainly I do not want to set them down as hypocrites. They had
seen Sister Ferguson take opium once or twice. She alleged that she
took it for neuralgia of the heart. Being afflicted with a disease of
that kind she had consulted some eminent physicians, and they had
advised her to take morphine for an affliction of that sort. It was
supposed to be a proper thing to take under the circumstances. Now,
while the taking of this morphine might look a little suspicious, yet
if they had had that same neuralgia, would it not have been the proper
thing to have said, "Oh, my sisters, won't you be merciful to me. And
while I am sick don't attribute my sickness to any wrong or any evil,
but won't you come and pray for me and be my good, kind sisters and
friends and help me in my affliction." That would have been the right
thing to have done instead of trying to find out something bad. There
was nothing that could be brought against Sister Ferguson here. She
had to stand the fire of all kinds of witnesses, and not one solitary
thing could be proven either against her moral conduct or against her
actions, or against her reputation in regard to these things—either as
a brandy drinker or as a morphine taker under those peculiar
circumstances.
Well, now, it would look naturally cruel to me to throw out
reflections, especially when a person was laboring under extreme pain,
and we ought not to give way to that kind of feelings, any of us. Why,
if I were to see the lowest and most de praved suffering under
an influence of that kind, I would want to follow the teaching given
by Jesus in regard to the man that had fallen among thieves and had
been abused and robbed. The Priest passed by on the other side of the
road, thinking doubtless it was only some poor devil. Then came a
Levite, and he passed by, thinking no doubt, "he is only a poor
outcast; let him die and be damned or anything else." But a certain
Samaritan came along, and his feelings seemed to be this: "You have
fallen among thieves. Won't you allow me to administer to you." That
would be proper. That is the way I look at it. I would do the same
thing to anybody that I saw in distress. I would not seek to injure
their reputation or to malign their character.
Now, I suppose that these sisters were mistaken in their ideas. I do
not think that they have bad hearts; but sometimes when people allow
their prejudices to run against a person, they carry these things too
far. While we are desirous to put down iniquity we must not go to work
and act a cruel part toward anybody. God does not do it. He sends His
rain on the evil and on the good. He causes His sun to shine on the
just and on the unjust. A wicked man's field may lay alongside a
righteous man's field. He don't take His sun off the field of the
wicked man. He makes no distinctions of that sort. He pours blessings
upon all, and He has to be merciful to us all, otherwise we would not
be as we are today, surrounded with the blessings we enjoy.
In regard to all these matters, it requires great care and great
discrimination. When those sisters came to me and reported that Sister
Ferguson had got out of the way, and read those charges, I felt
ashamed. I could hardly believe it at first. I said to them: "These
are grave charges you are making. Do you know that these things are
so?" They answered they thought they did. "Well," said I, "If these
things are true, Sister Ferguson is not fit to hold that position, nor
to be a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints."
For she was accused, you know, of being false—in other words, a liar.
Some things, too, were said to be strangely disappearing, so that she
was accused of being a thief; but when we come to inquire into these
things we find there was no foundation for the charges. They seem to
have arisen from unworthy jealousies. We should not be too ready in
harboring such feelings.
Now, I will tell you of a principle taught by Joseph Smith. It may be
of use to you as a High Council, and it will not hurt anybody else. In
speaking of the discernment of spirits, said he, a man may have the
gift of the discernment of spirits; he may see what is in the heart;
but because that has been revealed to him he has no business to bring
that as a charge against any person. The man's acts must be proved by
evidence and by witnesses.
I speak of these things for your information, and I do not know but I
have talked long enough.
Suffice it to say that as Latter-day Saints we ought to be under the
law of love, of kindness, and of mercy. And yet at the same time we
cannot overlook the wrong. It is right to probe certain things to the
bottom as you have done this thing. I was pleased to see the energy
displayed all the way through on both sides, and I think this is the
general feeling that prevails—a determination to ferret out wrong and
to correct evil. One thing is just as necessary as the other.
I have already published a statement about a woman who had committed
an act of adultery while her husband was away from home. I was written
to about it. Why, said I, cut her off from the Church. We cannot have
such people in the Church. Ultimately I requested the husband of the
woman to come and see me, but instead of coming himself he brought
along the seducer of his wife and three beautiful children—three as
beautiful children as I had seen anywhere and as promising. It made my
heart ache to see the position that that woman had placed her family
in. But I could not help it. She had entered into covenants which were
sacred. She had violated those covenants. The Book of Covenants says
that such people shall be destroyed. I could not change it. I did not
make that law. When they told me that the seducer was there, I said, I
do not want to see him. I can't have anything to do with such a
wretch—a man that would enter into a family and debauch another man's
wife while he was away, thus taking advantage of the circumstances in
which she was placed. I do not know who the man was; and I don't care.
I don't want to see him. The woman wept. "Can I stay in the Church,"
she asked. "No, madam, you can't." I could not assume the
responsibility, the Bishop could not assume the responsibility, the
High Council could not assume the responsibility without becoming
partakers of the crime. I have seen other things of a similar kind and
have had to deal with them. This High Council has no right to condone
sin. This is an error that people fall into. If men transgress and
violate the laws of God, they have no right but to deal with them
according to the law of God. Treat them kindly; do the best you can
for them, but do not condone their crimes. Apostles, Prophets,
Pastors, Teachers, Deacons, and High Councils are placed in the Church
as they formerly were, for the perfecting of the Saints; not to pass
over iniquity because of certain influences. No influence of any kind
ought to control you, only the pure principles of eternal truth as
laid down in the law of God. No man can inherit a celestial kingdom
who does not keep a celestial law. No man can inherit a terrestrial
kingdom unless he abides a terrestrial law, and no man can inherit a
telestial kingdom unless he abides a telestial law. And it is for us
to see that these laws are executed. We must purge ourselves from sin.
Then, in regard to this affair. As I have already said, I think there
was a little weakness in Sister Ferguson and in those sisters. And is
there not a little weakness in all of us? I have many weaknesses and
infirmities. Shall we condemn one another? No. But I wanted to point
out some of these things for the benefit of this Board of Directors,
of Sister Ferguson, of this High Council, and of all concerned, that
we may be enabled to look carefully, dispassionately and intelligently
into all of these matters, and seek for the Spirit of the living God.
It is your privilege as a High Council always to know the right, if
you are living your religion and keeping the commandments of God, and
to have the inspiration of the Most High to guide you in your acts,
and if you have that and seek unto the Lord, He will bless you and
guide you in all of your doings. And so He will bless all men who seek unto
Him, for as many as are led by the Spirit of God they are the sons
of God. And we have to discriminate between the laws of the
world and the laws of God. We have no need to break any just and
equitable laws, and never mean to.
Now in regard to the position of the United States today. What a
pitiful example we have when we come to look at it. They talk about
our debauchery and corruption. Why they have twenty criminals right
among us to our one, and more than that. I have read that in
Springville, out of the outsiders there, 45 percent of them are in
some way or other, some lesser and some greater, violators of the law.
Yes, according to statistics that are clear, pointed and plain they
have from 20 to 80 violators of the law to the Latter-day Saints one.
Well, that is not much for us to boast of, for we ought not to have
any. But, then, the idea of our being accused of licentiousness and
crime, and these pure people being sent out here to correct our
morals!
But it is all right. We will try to do right, maintain the law and
sustain all correct principles. We put up with a good deal of
indignity. Still we will do right and leave ourselves in the hands of
God; for if we do right and cleave unto Him, He will take care of us;
He will avenge the cause of Zion, and judge the men who are fighting
against her; and I say now, as I have before, over and over again,
Woe! to them that fight against Zion, for God will fight against them.
We will pursue our course and observe the law of God, and keep His
commandments.
And I say God bless this High Council with the President and his
councilors; God bless the brethren and sisters associated with the
Hospital; and those sisters who may have unwittingly done wrong; they
will try and do better; and Sister Ferguson, if she has walked a
little too strait, she will try to be a little more pliable; and we
will all try to move along and feel that we are living among the
Saints of God, and that we are of one family and one household.
God bless you all and lead you in the paths of life, in the name of
Jesus, Amen.
Brother Angus M. Cannon asks: Do we understand you to sustain the
decision of the Council? Certainly I do. I feel always like sustaining
such things. And I will say, moreover, that it is very seldom I find
it necessary to change what has taken place and been decided by the
High Councils, among all the High Councils there are in the Church.
And why should they not do right? Men that are disinterested, men who
are working for nothing, men who are seeking to adjust difficulties
among their brethren, and who meet together from time to time and
spend hours and days and weeks in adjusting these difficulties, simply
for the love of God and humanity and to correct error and establish
the principles of righteousness, etc.
In regard to Sister Ferguson, I give you my right hand of fellowship
and say God bless you, and try and be a little more humble. And I will
do the same to those other sisters. God bless you all. Try to
ameliorate the wants and sufferings of humanity, and seek to do all
the good that lays in your power; for as you do good to others God
will be good to you. God bless you all in the name of Jesus Christ,
Amen.
The following are the remarks made at the investigation, or trial, by
President Angus M. Cannon, and the decision of the High Council in the case above referred to:
President Angus M. Cannon proceeded to review the evidence which had
been adduced in the investigation. He took the charges seriatum. With
respect to the first charge—that of taking morphine to excess—he held
that there was no evidence to support the allegation. It was admitted
by Sister Ferguson that she had been accustomed to take morphine to
relieve her from pain induced by neuralgia of the heart; but never,
except upon one occasion, was she rendered incapable of attending to
her duties by the taking of this drug, and it was very supposable that
severe pain was the cause of her administering what appeared to be an
overdose. But was she to be denounced as a confirmed morphine taker
because upon this one occasion she had administered an overdose of
this drug? Was that circumstance to be used as a means to destroy her
communion with the Church, to destroy her reputation, and to brand her
as being an habitual slave to this terrible medicine? By no means.
With regard to the second charge—that of being false—President Cannon
said he had not discovered anything in the evidence to substantiate
that Sister Ferguson was false. She might have appeared to be
arbitrary, commanding, in her desire to have respect and obedience
from those under her charge; but a good deal of this kind of feeling
appeared to have arisen from jealousy and from watching for faults,
and when found, magnifying them to a great extent.
In reference to the third charge—that of stealing medicine from the
Hospital—it had been proved that Sister Ferguson took some pills once,
and they were administered to an outside patient of the Hospital, she
took this medicine as was her right, for the use of outside patients.
And as to the taking of brandy—about which so much had been made—all
the evidence upon that point was that Sister Ferguson had asked the
nurse once for a "sling" of brandy to be brought to her room, and she
felt that she had need of it. Was it criminal for her to take a little
brandy under those circumstances? Was she to be proclaimed as a
drunkard? Not by any means.
Fourth charge—that of malpractice in the case of an old woman by the
alleged administration of morphine—was held to be entirely unfounded.
The old woman referred to was in a bad state of dropsy, and in a dying
condition when brought to the hospital; she suffered great pain; and
doubtless, as a doctor, and considering it the right thing, sister
Ferguson did administer morphine for the purpose of relieving the
patient from pain and getting her to sleep. The patient subsequently
died. But because of this was sister Ferguson to be accused of causing
her death? No.
The very fact of the sisters having signed those charges showed that
they conceived them to be right. They expected this matter to be
investigated. They expected to meet Sister Ferguson face to face. The
question had been asked, did Sister Snow prompt the sisters to write
those charges. The reply was elicited that Sister Van Schoonhoven made
a draft of the complaints and that Sister McLean copied it. Sister
Snow took it for granted that the charges were true, not thinking,
probably, the damaging effect they would have upon the character of
Sister Ferguson. This being the case it was concluded that it would
not do for Sister Ferguson to be allowed to continue in her
position. He (President Cannon) had no doubt that Sister Snow
believed every word of the charges, and after considering the easiest
mode of letting Ferguson down, the Executive Board asked her, finally,
to resign. They did not see, apparently, that this would come out and
damage, as it had done, the reputation of Sister Ferguson; but having
become a party to this thing, they shouldered the responsibility. On
the other hand, while he maintained that these charges had not been
sustained, still, under the circumstances, he thought the wisest thing
the Board could do was to ask Sister Ferguson to resign her position
in the hospital. Her resignation was not asked with the intention to
hurt her. But the devil took advantage of the position and used it to
the injury of Sister Ferguson. He would say, however, that if Sister
Ferguson would live humbly before the Lord and take what had
transpired for good, and listen to counsel, the Lord would bless her,
and the Lord would bless those sisters who had erred in this matter
unwittingly, if they would take hold of Sister Ferguson and help her
along, and thus promote union and fellowship in our midst as the sons
and daughters of God upon the earth.
The decision therefore in this case will be: That these charges are
not sustained against Sister Ferguson before this council; but I do
think the sisters acted wisely under the circumstances in asking her
to resign. That is my judgment. But that the evil one has magnified
these charges to the injury of Sister Ferguson in that investigation
was not had at the time. And I would say to these sisters, take hold
of Sister Ferguson by the hand and help her to sustain her reputation
and practice before this people, and as you seek to build her up so
the Lord will build you up and bless you by increasing your influence
for good.