Show lG sYM THIZING 17 WITH POLYGAMY f It is the common trick of unscrupulous unscru-pulous politicians to accuse their opponents of opposing some popular end because they oppose the particular par-ticular measure by which the unscrupulous un-scrupulous politicians seek to attain that end It is always a piece of insolence to impute to a man other motives than those he avows for his action Mr Haskell took advantage ad-vantage of his opportunity in closing I clos-ing the debate to offer this impertinence imperti-nence to the democrats who opposed his antipolygamy bill The Times of this city repeats Mr Haskells impertinence The impertinence of charging everybody who opposed the Ed munds bill with favoring polygamy is less irritating than such a charge usually is for the reason that it is selfevidently absurd There is absolutely no party of sympathizers with polygamy in the country except its practitioners themselves them-selves who are at most only represented in Congress by a single territorial delegate Nothing can be more insane than to accuse democrats I demo-crats of secretly exchanirinir r vows of friendship with the Mormons who are of no earthly use to the democrats demo-crats or any other party There are not ten Votes to be had outside of Utah by conciliating the polygamous polyg-amous sentiment of tile country The charge of sympathy is indeed so absurd that if one knew nothing else about Mr Haskells bill he would infer there was some rascality ras-cality in it from which the beating of this tomtom by Mr Haskell and by the Times was intended to divert public attention That inference is warranted by the facts The bill is an abominable bill It gratifies that itch for meddling with other peoples peo-ples affairs on moral grounds which has afflicted the republican party from the beginning There are some thousands of people in the United States who cannot rest under un-der the knowledge that other people in one of the territories of the United States for whose behavior they are nowise responsible choose to practice polygamy These people are willing to take away from persons per-sons suspected of practising polygamy polyg-amy every safeguard to convict them of crime without trial and to punish them on suspicion This is exactly what this bill does The difficulty in dealing legally with polygamy is the difficulty of proving prov-ing polygamy Common rumor will not do and common rumor is all the evidence that can in most cases be brought in The bill does away with that difficulty by disfranchising disfranchis-ing all persons suspected by inspectors inspec-tors election of being polygamists No polygamist is to be allowed to vote and no polygamist is to be allowed al-lowed to sit on a jury The question ques-tion at onoe arises how it is to be determine will is and who is not a polygamist Mr Reagan undertook to settle that question oy inserting any person duty convicted ot icing a polygauiist Tins thr Houic voted down and thu clocnel s ej irIs in Utah with in i capons b r power of excluding from jure i id inspectors of e cuun Whit u t i responsible power of exc ultu fr 1 voting all persons wiioin ill v euu > < to exclude Imagine a law ii ur tin t-in this city by which it w i3 pi u vided that no disrepa ibi pry should be allowed to vote tt i sF election and inspectors app ini by French and Nichols to carry out the law All persons wi i r dil u a belong either to the rep iVa 1 trt chine or the Tamman m In rr would of course be distl l 1 t once and every disreput i era i would be construed to ac e er reputable person Of course such a law in New York would last no longer than it could be got before a court it is probable that Mr Edmunds bill though it has been drawn by a sharp lawyer may meei a 1 When inspector rehi I v 1 r of a person whom h > Mije III pretends that lie suspects to b a polygamist the first court to which the case is referred wilt probably decide de-cide that the mere suspicion ot the inspector is not good ground ± cr throwing out a vote md that a polygamist must mean a person who has been duly convicted of practia alg polygamy But the republican in Congress have none the less sho vn their ai position to use the uiiersal sentiment senti-ment of the country uainst polygamy polyg-amy as a pretext to set up an arbi tiMrv and irresponsible l government inbUh Most of them know no more than they care about the principles prin-ciples of free government But it is discreditable to the democratic minority that they did not vote solidly against this ouuigeous measure and that any ot them should have been deterred by the senseless accusation I tf Sascpll that they symyathized with polygamy from voting as even man at co be a I member of the Uousv or Ruresen tatives must have known that he I ought to vt Sack coiru i and sense as were shown bv Ah Tuclxer and Mr Belmont were more conspicuous con-spicuous in the debate than they would have been if the democrats in the House had done their duty As the World has often insisted polygamy will cease in Utah as soon as the weigit of social opinion in Utah is thrown against irthat is to say as soon as the social condition con-dition of Lit ih is nssunihited to the social condition of the rest of the United States It cannot 6s effectually effec-tually put down s > vjnei and any attempt at-tempt to govern Utah by m ° ins of minority of its inhabit viii produce many mischiefsmuch graver than the piovisiora toeratio i o polygamy while ir i will 11t i a I the mischief of plygttnnyNrv York World |