Show DIVERSION OF THE legislative appropriation LAST lads session of congress 3 that honorable orabie body boily induced thereto by the wilful misrepresentations of unscrupulous political adventurers connected with the utah ring diverted the appropriation of originally designed for the legislature of this territory to pay the expenses of courts acting under U S judges and other TJ S officers As a consequence the members of the tho utah legislature did what no other legislature in the republic aib 0 lic ilc was patriotic enough to do they sat the whole session through las without one ono dollar of p pecuniary ecu acu i nairy compensation A similar diversion ef of the appropriation pria tion instituted for fon the legislature of utah it appears is to be made the present session of congress this thia does doea note eem te to ua us to be a very straight forward or honorable transaction if congress desires to pay the expenses expense of the courts in utah as it ought to do they being controlled wholly by ua US officers under U S law the proper way would be to make the appropriation directly and directly by diverting the funds designed for a nother another purpose the diversion is made evidently with tha the view of punishing the members of the utah legislature what foi what crime have they committed have they committed any ally crime if they have committed any erime crime when were the proceedings ce instituted to prove it when were they tried when con when sentenced if they have committed com raitt ed crime andreen and been tried t done oy the courts or by congreso we wiver heard of such a case in the codias courts la Is it the duty of congress to try persons p erious charged with crime orime ared arid convict jiin evin i vidt viet sentence Aen tence tenee and abd y I 1 u 1 I 1 i them Is this the tho 1 fi legislative or the judi j j J power Z 1 I P chap general 1 under LAndi i tig ia is that this thia is a judicial jud iclal uly uty not a legislative duty A len JOB why does congress presume Pre silme i try itry convict cou cuu viet vict sentence and puni h ihl lr legislature of utah upon I 1 ariy riy lit uit charge c rge la Is congress Con gresa exceed AO ng 1 its constitutional prerogatives in uhla this respect peuL it may be said that congress has not presumed to try convict and sentence the legislature of utah that it has only diverted this appropriation pria tion as a punishment of that nody body lody 0 is that it has congress the right then that ia Is denied to the judiciary evena even to punish persons without trial conviction sentence or due course of law we always understood that every person charged with crime had a right to a speedy and impartial trial a lawful trial before a jury of his peers lawfully impanel led but it appears that congress presumes to dispense with this constitutional right in the case of the utah legislature 17 ture and punish the members thereof by withholding wit holding their usual pay without any trial hearing or any kind of judicial proceedings whatever if this is the case then certainly the country is progressing very fast in a certain direction whether it be in a desirable direction or not is another question and a very serious one again for what reason does congress I 1 presume to punish the utah legislature with what crime is th that at legislature charged gro 0 the poland bill put court cattersen matters entirely in the hands bands of U S meers officers off nud un d excluded territorial off meers officers from the same and the utah legislature would not appropriate anything to pay tho expenses of the courts Is that it how did congress know that the utah legislature would not make any appropriation pria tion to pay the expenses of these courts though controlled en tirel yby byUS U S officer the poland bill was passed a year and a half and the diversion of the appropriation for the legislature of utah by the last congress was made nearly a year before the legislature le of utah sitting biennial bi ly could sit and show whether it would or would not make any appropriation for the e expenses ape of hose courts yes but laut 00 congress agress was apprehensive that the leekala ture of utah would not make any ampro appropriation for that purpose when it dit did meet 0 then congress presumes not only to punish parsons persons without trial hearing or judicial proceedings of any kind bue but also to punish them in advance for fear they may commit a crime I 1 this is a most extraordinary policy for a republic especially punish people before they do the thing for which they are punished this lis is a wonderful kind of business and this is a go a truly As it happened however when the utah legislature did meet the last winter that body did make a an in appropriation to pay the expenses of the courts nevertheless the tho members did not receive one dollar of thein their pay go 0 o that they were punished beforehand by congress for fear that they would not make any appropriation to sustain the courts and when they sat and did make an appropriation still the punishment ent was not re remitted it e nor ner their proper campen compensation c which fell was as honestly earned paid aid ald 0 over er to them on the cont contrary r an and notwithstanding their a appropriative action a similar diversion of the appropriation for their legislative pay is under way in congress this session this is a still more wonderful kind of a policy punish people without thial or heaning hearing for not doing a thing they have no chance to do and nd when they have a chance to do it and do do it still withhold remission of the punishment ish ment and prepare to punish them in the same way again for fear they will not do the thing wished two years hence talk of the peculiar ways of bf utah people what are they to these peculiar ways of the congress of the united states but what right has congress regularly or irregularly in advance of or subsequently to the action or non action complained of to punish the legislature of utah for not making appropriations to sustain the courts or to require that legislature to make such it has no right in equity or justice it bas has merely the right of might the right of sheer brute force Is the government of this republic founded upon the right of sheer brute force form was it for this our patriotic forefathers a century back threw off the british yoke and fought and bled and died they might have had this kind of govern ment without rebelling and fighting Is this the kind of centennial we are expected to celebrate th this year of grace the centennial of the aph triumph of might over right of brute force over reason and justice let us hope not let us hope for better things I 1 in n this last quarter of the nineteenth century and in this lauded land of liberty why should the legislature aud and people of utah be required to find means to sustain these courts the laws under which tile the courts operate were not enacted by the utah legislature neither the legislature nor the people of utah have any voice in the tho appointment of the officers controlling the courts therefore why should the legislature or the people of utah be required to pay these off meers officers or the expenses expense of the courts the legislature did not establish the courts courts nor employ the officers thereof those who establish institutions should pay the expenses thereof and not expect other people to do it those who employ men to do any kind ef of work should pay the wages salaries or compensation of those men and not expect other people to do it if the legislature of utah had established the courts it would have been incumbent on that body to provide for the expenses of the courts if the legislature of utah had appointed directly y or indirectly the officers of those courts it would have been incumbent en on the legislature to pay those off meers officers but the legislature did neither the one nor the other neither created the courts nor korap ap pointed tho off meers officers thereof was not allowed to do it and therefore it is not just to require tho the legislature to pay those officers nor to pay the expenses cf the courts it 11 congress and the legislature of the territory cometo a mutual agreement that the legislature should provide for these payments that is i a dif dlf different lerent thing alto aito altogether agether ether there is no brute force torce in tg that a t no might against right it is a friendly understanding der standing and arrangement and there is no constitutional law against that i if congress has the right 10 to dic dle tate how bow the legislature of a territory s shall hall appropriate the territorial revenue what is the use of having a local legislature why does not congress assume all the cf of that legislature A local legislature is a mere farce and delusion under cinder such circumstances if congress can require the legislature 0 of a territory to pay court officers appointed by the U B S and the expenses of those courts courtr congress can require that legislature to pay other meers officers off and other ex expenses pe rikes likes if congress can require the legislature of a territory to pay a judicial of officer fleer congress pan an require that legislature to pay an executive officer or a military officer why not if congress can pan require the legislature of ater a territory eltory to pay the expenses of courts and their off meers officers why may not lood loon congress gress require that legislature to bay the expenses of a governor and my his suite or those of a general of the army and his sti subordinate bordin i ate cers cera and nd troop troops we should like to tr know 0 w |