Show UNLAWFUL HOBBIES OF COURTS JUDGE BORDEN of massachusetts has sprung the question whether an applicant for citizenship can be considered of good moral character who has been convicted of maintaining a liquor nuisance the naturalization laws provide that it shall be made to appear to the satisfaction of the co court urt among other things that the app applicant lipaut has behaved as a man of good moral character attached to the principles of the constitution of the united states and well weli disposed to the good order and happiness of the same whether a man who has sold liquor in violation of law has behaved as a man of good moral character and well disposed to good order is a question that be differently y decided by differ different ent courts A judge who is rigid on the temperance ques tion might rule that no nian man can traffic h in liquor and be a good moral character particularly if lie he had rendered himself liable to the law in n so doing while another judge who takes his toddy or his bitters regularly might think there was nothing immoral in the business and that a technical tech nial in fraction of stringent liquor liguor ae laws ws was no disqualification for citizenship but this singling out of some special offense as a bar to naturalization is wrong because it is invidious it is riding a hobby horse and makes the rider ridiculous the term a good moral character embraces a great deal it covers the general life and character of the candidate A chronic liar asfar is far worse than a liquor dealer however one may view the traffic in intoxicants A libertine is not a man of a good moral character but who knows of a jud judge questioning an applicant as to his 1 illicit iu icat amours or his frequenting the haunts of sin an habitual drunkard is not to be classed with a temperate man in qualifications for citi citizenship zenshi i but what court ever inquires into ta the e drinking habits of a candidate in utah the hobby afi tile the courts on naturalization grounds is poly polygamy amy and the queries of the catechizing catechi zing judges are not confined to the doings of the past they reach forward into the unknown and illimitable future there is no provi provision u for this in the law the judge is to be satisfied that the applicant has behaved in a certain way while he has resided in the united states it gives him no authority to catechize the applicant as to the future it says nothing about intentions it requires no promises of the applicant except that which is covered by the oath and that Is simply that he will support the constitution of the united states 1 I 1 all the points on which the court must be satisfied relate to the past if he has behaved as a man of a good moral character etc that is all that is required except proof of residence and the oath of renunciation and allegiance there are two things in which the federal courts in utah are wrong on the naturalization question in the first place they improperly confine their interrogations as to past morality to one qualification and neglect others of greater importance A man who acknowledges to having two wives at the same time is summarily rily rejected though he may be honest truthful industrious thrifty a reliable citizen intelligent progressive I 1 respected by his neighbors and true to his family but one who has broken every commandment man dment in the decalogue a lazy shiftless worthless scamp if he can pass muster as a bachelor or a mono monogamist can be admitted to citizens citizenship hp without a murmur he may be an adulterer a seducer an inebriate a swindler a liar a profaner and with the vilest of either sey a wife beater of no particular value to the commonwealth indeed a dead weight upon society but so long as he has not taken to himself more wives than one he is all right for naturalization if he can up the fees if this is not wrong in principle and detrimental in practice we fail to see otherwise and we can find no warrant in the naturalization laws tor for such discrimination if any judge thinks a creature of the latter class preferable as a citizen to a man of the former we pity him and think his lils estimate of a good moral character is no evidence of that judgment and appreciation which should distinguish the judicial mind second place they are wrong in demanding agreements as to this special matter in the future if it is essential that a man shall agree not to marry more than one wife or live with more than one woman in the marriage relation in time to come is it not also requisite that he be should promise not to be a drunkard a libertine a thief a violator of any law for the protection of society why single out the one law and demand a covenant for its observance to the exclusion of others it looks as though the judges who extort this promise care not how many murderers seducers adulterers cat tle drunkards gamblers andl and law brakers duerally geue eue rally may exercise the privilege of long as a man who may probably in good faith and sincerity and with the agreement of all the parties enter into solemn marriage covenant with more than one woman is P prevented r from becoming a citizen of b his is adopted country As we have shown there is no law for either of these wrongs they are assumptions they are in excess of law they are regulations made and adopted by the utah courts they are in the nature of legislation they are added to the law of congress if the courts consider they are not satisfied that an applicant who has practiced plural marriage is a man of good moral character they may of course single out that as a disqualification because they have the power but there is not a line of law which authorizes their catechism as to the future and everything of that character which enters into the special proceedings in the natura naturalization libation liza tion of mormons cormons Mor mons is usurpation and unlawful discrimination against a class the law was meant to bear equally upon all and no matter what may be the special object picked out for invidious action it is contrary to the spirit and letter of the act of con congress ress and is to be despised and condemned by fair minded citizens of every class and degree |