| Show MORE more SOUND BOUND ARGUMENT IN the senate of the united states on the of february during the debate on the edmunda bill senator morgan handled the subject in vigorous style we give up consid esble esbie space apace to this discussion believing it will interest our readers as much as anything we can present following Foli owing are senator morgana morgans remarks rema rems ka CONCLUDED A it is very true that it is not a re publican manner of dealing with such questions to deprive a man twenty one years of age ago of his right of suli sull rage unless it Is for a cause which makes him infamous it is very true that the doctrine of equality in the exercise of suffrage prevails under our system as essentially in the territories as it does in the states where cherb wa we grant the right of suffrage in a territory to the people thereof it is always understood to be granted upon terms of equality as between each other it is that which makes the night right valuable under the constitution of the united states and makes republican institutions in the sense in which I 1 mention them equally pervade all the communities of this country I 1 do not take issue upon the question that the congress of the united states have thela theja the power ower to impose additional dit ional dis qualifications I 1 do however say that there is another feature of the law another feature of constitutional law thrust the just rights righta and benefits of which belong to every man who is a citizen of the united states irrespective of what part of the country he ne may be found that protects him against a conviction for a crime no matter punishment may be unless after conviction had according to due course of law jaw and by the decision of tha the judicial department of the government you cannot place the citizens of the united states in any part of its domain where the laws of the united states obtain and where courts are organized for the purpose of enforcing those laws and there deprive him min of the rights which the constitution guarantees to him the rights that the consal aution has affirmed in his beham behalf whenever he Is accused of or crime I 1 m e whatever the punishment t off of f t may ay be he be has a right to be tried according to ther the forms of law and by judicial tribunals except only in mhd be eases cases excepted in the constitution of trials by court martial this bill deprives a citizen in the territory of utah of that right this bill enables five commissioners appointed by the Preal president dent and con by the senate without any trial or hearing at af all ali without t information without indictment without summoning a witness to institute an inquiry and to arrive at a conclusion that a person a citizen of the united states in the territory of utah has violated this law lah and that in consequence of his violation of it he must be disfranchised franchised dis as a punishment I 1 think it will not be denied that the taking from a man the right to vote in consequence of an act which is denounced in the statute as being criminal is a punishment you may loek look him up in the penitentiary after you convict him before n court and jury and that is punishment ish lah ment you yiu may fine him and bhatla that is punishment by your fine yoa you take so much of his property y for the publio public use in the nature of punishment you may disqualify him for office or remove him from office aa as a punishment you can deny him the right to vote and that is punishment but but iwho who can do thatis the question it biff 7 must be done whenever a crime is alleged in the statute and therun ashment is annexed to the offense by kl 61 the statute by the judicial tri bun 0 als all of the country and according to the forms of law that is a guarantee that is not given to the citizens of thel the united states by the constitution it is merely preserved in that instrument that right belonged to american civilization and law long before the constitution was adopted it is like the right of bearing arms like many other nights rights ri 9 ats that might be mentioned here which existed in behalf of the alti citizen in colonial times and existed in every state and rind the provisions which gere were introduced in the constitution ution by way of amendment as well as those in the original instrument which stand for the protection of these rights were mere guarantees of an existing right and were not the creators of the right itself it has been a right of an ameri amerl can citizen during all the colonial period and it is a right right in every state also and so it t is a right in every part of the territory of the united states over which the federal government has exclusive jurisdiction that the citizen when he Is a confronted confront eid eld with a crime and punishment as the result of his guilt if it is to be affixed upon him has a constitutional right to trial by due process process of jaw and by judicial authority ity this bill takes that right away Is it any answer to say that the right to vote is not property that it is a mere privilege or that the right to sit on a jury Is not property is only a privilege certainly not because u se even we though it is a privilege pu put t it t u upon on the lowest classification th that at you plea seif ft a statute says that man shall be deprived of it if that is affixed aa as a punishment under the same law which prescribes the gult guit it 11 is punishment for a crime then the very statute which characterizes the offense 15 as a crime entitles the man to a trial according to the forms of law and before a judicial tribunal whatever you may choose to declare a crime in this countr country Y I 1 do not care what it may be the very moment that you declare it a crime by a statute of the united states bat moment ti tj Constitution comes in and guarantees to that citizen that no punishment for that crime can be inflicted upon him of any character whatsoever unless it is done according to the due process or ot law and through the judicial tribunals of the country that is my proposition this bill pays no attention to this guarantee ot 0 the constitution these five commis have the right light as linter pret the proposed statute and as I 1 have no doubt it was intended to be interpreted to assemble themselves together as a board of review as a returning board a board of canvassers to examine the ballot boxes boxed in the territory of utah and when they find in their private judgment and upon such sueh evidence as they may taink proper to receive without the presence of and without being confronted with the accused without indictment or information that a man is guilty of bigamy or polygamy they will take his ballot from the box and destroy it and thereby disfranchise difranchise him depriving him of one of his rights of citizenship and that too not merely for the purpose of rejecting the vote of a man who under the statute might not have had the right to vote but to punish him for the crime of bigamy by taking from him hini the elective franchise that is a right which was guaranteed tt at the time ve we enacted the law organizing this territory for the moment we put the citizens in utah in possession of the rights of american citizen citizens within swithin that territory by the tha act of 1850 P we gave them then the guarantees of the constitution of the united states which would follow them in all cams cases and in all places for the protection of their personal right rights secured to them under the law by the community at large and to all men who are described in the fifth section of the act of 1850 as being citizens and settled in that territory two cases have come up in the supreme courtot the united states in close blose succession which I 1 think clearly establish the doctrine for which I 1 am contending now as against this section of the bill and I 1 will take the liberty of reading something from those decisions to show their applicability to the section upon which I 1 have been remarking the arst first was the case of cummings vs va the state of missouri an attempt was made in the constitution ot of that state to deprive a number of persons persona of certain rights and privileges of a similar character because they refused to take what was called there the ironclad oath who refused to exculpate for having hating pant part participated iel lel in the then recent rebellion it la Is not necessary to read all the statement of the casein case cabe in order to get before the senate the part of it which I 1 think is applicable to this particular matter the court say every person who Is unable to tako take this oath Is declared incapable or of holding holdings in the state barky ganly any office of honors honor trust grust or profits profit under lis lia authority or of being an sa officer councilman director or trustee or other manager of any corporation public or private now existing or he realtor established by its authority or ol 01 acting sodas as a professor or teacher in any educational institution or in any common mo 1 or other school schools or of holding any real i estate t a f or r other property in trust for the use of any arly church religious society or congregation and every person holding at the time timo the constitution takes effect any of tho the offices trusts trust er positions mentioned Is required q u i ae within sixty days thereafter to take the 0 oath at and if be he fall to comply compty with this requirement it Is declared that his office trust or position shall ipso pao facto become vacant no person after the expiration of sixty dam days la Is permitted without taking taff n the oath oathy uto to practice as on an attorney or counselor at law nor after that period can any person be competent as a bishops bishop priest deacon deacons minister elder elders or other clergyman of anarell any religious sect sects or de denomination nomina U 0 n to teach or preach or solemnize marriages kine fine and imprisonment aro are prescribed as a punishment for holding or exercising any of the the tho offices positions trusts professions or functions specified without having taken the oaths oath and false swearing or amr amu mation matlon in tairi taking X it Is declared to bo perjury punishable by imprisonment in the penitentiary after commenting further upon the nature of the oath that was required under that constitution the court proceeded to say wo we admit the propositions prepositions of the counsel ol 01 missouri blisso uri url that the states which welch existed previous on to the adoption of the federal constitution possessed originally all the tho attributes of sovereignty that they vhey still retain those attributes except as i hoy boy hare have been surrendered by the formation of the constitution and the amendments thereto that abo new states up upon their thele admission into gho the union became invested with equal and were thereafter subject only to R oi rial ml atri eions ana and that among the rights reserved to the tho states la is the right of each state to determine ma the qualifications for office and the conditions upon which us its citizens may exercise their various callings and pursuits wa within tha ita jurisdiction these are general propositions and involve principles ol 01 tho the highest moment but bat it by no means follows that under the tha form of cresting creating cr a qualification or attaching a condi tion units tho the states can in effect inflict mulct a ok punishment for a past act which was noc DOC purd at the time it was committed the question to is not as to the existence of the power of tho the state over matters of internal police but w whether bother that power has been made in the i present case an instrument for tor the of punishment ag inhibit inhibition of tha tho co constitution qualifications relate to tho the fitness or capacity of the party for sou a particular pursuit or profession webster defines the term to mean any natural endowment or any acquirement qui rement which alta a person for a place places office or employment or enables him to sustain any character with success it la 18 evident from the nature cf ct the pursuits and pro fo rel fol sOns istona of the parties placed under disabilities by the constitution of man of the acts from the tho taint of which they must purge themselves have no possible relation to their fitness for tor those pursuits and and here Is what fits this case A mafi man who has been guilty of polygamy or bigamy may still have a large interest hi in the country he may and ought to have a very numerous family to protect by his bis ballot he has a great interest in the enactments of jaws for the preservation of the rights of human beings considered by themselves it is scarcely to be supposed that a man by a course of conduct of this character has disqualified himself in any essential way from casting an intelligent vote or that he has haa lost his interest in the community to that extent that lie he is not expected to feel any responsibility in connection with his vote so that th the e disconnection between the punishment inflicted and the causes of disqualification and the purposes and offices of the ballot were not mo more re obvious und under erthe the constitution of missouri than they are in the case before the senate today to day there can dan be but one interpretation given to this statute as it stands reported ty the committee and that is that the deprivation of the right of suffrage is in tended intended only as a punishment so I 1 think thins the supreme court justly would be bound to hold that this law would not be valid there can bo be aa no connection between the fact that mr cumming 3 entered tho the state ef missouri uri url to avoid enrollment enrolment or draft in the military service or of the tho united states and ies his fitness to teach the doctrines or admin adain administer ter the sacraments ot of his hla church nor can a fact ct of this kind or the expression of words of sympathy with bome some of the persons drawn into the rebellion constitute any evidence of the unfitness of the attorney or counselor to t 0 practice his profession or of tho the professor profess arto orto to teach leach leach the tho ordinary branches of education educations or of of business knowledge or busl busi ness new capacity in the manager of a corporation dionor or in any director or trus teus trustee teel teen it la is manifest upon the simple statement of many of the acts act and of the professions and purs pursuits that there Is no such buch between then them as to render a denial dental of the commission or of the acts at all appropriate as a condition ot or allowing the exercise of the professions and pursuits it the oath could not there therefore soret foret have flave been required as a means of ascertaining whether bother parties qualified or not toe tor their respective callings or the tha trust which they were ch charged arKeL it was required in order to reach the tho person not t the be becalming calling it was exacted not from froat any ant notion that the several acts designated indicated unfitness for the too callings but because it was thought that tho the several AM acts deserved punishment and that for many of them thero thoro was waa no noway way to inflict punishment except by depriving the parties who had bad commett committed tho the hight right and privileges of the tho citizen I 1 care not what right or privilege of a citizen it may be that you deprive geive him of whether it IB Is the right of holding office or wh whether elther erther it Is s the right to vote or whether it is any other right that may be named the right of property or what not if the purpose is to deprive him of any right or privilege as a punishment for crime then you must bring in the judiciary and have the man tried for the crimo crime before the right can be forfeited under the constitution of |
