Show THE RIGHT OF OPINION IT is no bar to naturalization if an applicant believes a law of the united states to be wrong or impolitic so long as aa he does not violate the law but is willing to obey it while it exists it is the right of every citizen to dissent from any public measure whether it has been materialized into law or not to work against its adoption while it is a theory and to operate for its repeal after it has become a legal fact this government does not make war upon opinions the law does not punish or seek to control beliefs they are left free to every soul under the sun we mention these indisputable facts because the attempt has been made during the past few days to confuse applicants for naturalization on the matter of their belief in relation to the polygamy question questions have hav e been allowed which ought not to be put to any man before a court and they have been plied with cunning and rapidity to embarrass em barass the inexperienced for de purpose of I 1 re venting members of the peoples peopled party from acquiring the right to vote the object of the anti polygamy laws is to suppress and prevent so far as possible the practice of what has been known here as plural mar ariage and the relations growing out of it congress has not eti engaged in the new business of proselytism it assumes no power over mens thoughts or opinions or even their freedom of expression concerning those opinions no man is de barred from voting because of his abts belief on any subject on the contrary the edmunds law says specifically that a citizen shall not be excluded from the polls I 1 on account of any opinion such person may entertain on the subject of bigamy or polygamy thus congress emphasizes a common and constitutional right with which no person can fere if a voter cannot be lawfully excluded from the polls on account of his opinions on these subjects neither can an applicant for citizenship be denied naturalization on those grounds A man may conscientiously believe that it would not dot be morally wrong for some men to have more wives than one if there was no law forbidding it but seeing there Is a law against it he would not practice bigamy or polygamy himself and if on a jury would find a defendant guilty if the evidence showed he had broken the law this would be entirely consistent also a man might agree sincerely that he be would obey a law which he considered ajaj unjust and unwise and while he kept his promise he could strive for its repeal and express breely freely his opinion as to its demerits and no 40 one could deny him any rights on that ground or logically claim that his course was inconsistent either with his agreement or with sound reason this will hold good in relation to any law of the land will it be claimed that railroad companies which conform to the interstate inter state commerce law have no right to denounce it to agitate for its repeal to point out its I 1 injustice nj ustice or its imperfections if a man obeys the excise and customs regulations may he not believe them to be harme barme ful and outrageous and say so freely and yet be a good citizen even so a man may firmly determine not to violate the anti my laws and yet maintain that they ought never to have been enacted it is a flagrant violation of the spirit and letter of the constitution and institutions of this free land when any individual is denied the rights and privileges of citizenship for his abstract belief no lawyer ought to attempt any such outrage no court ought to permit it petty fogging for political purposes is a disgrace to anyone who resorts re to i such a low lived pra practice atice and it will pay members of the bar much better in the long run to preserve the dignity of their profession than to petty tricks for a special purpose if an alien has not shown by his past conduct and will not pledge himself to prove by future actions that he be is attached to the constitution of the united states and well disposed to the good order and happiness of the same let him be rejected when he applies for naturalization iza tion but in view of that constitution ution of the laws of congress and of the rulings of the supreme court of the united states let not a mans religious belief or abstract opinion be a subject of discussion in a court or made the sole reason for rejecting his application to be admitted as a citizen there are dayo day and years yet to come and when right triumphs as it will only those who respect the right will themselves be respected |