| Show IF NOT WHY NOT THE paper which has been insisting inai insi atin stin on nand and plotting for the ment of monogamous mormon 1 citi zens because they do nut not in re its view regard the anti polygamy laws lawo as essential to morality this morning speaks of 0 the act for the of silver asan as an infamous law andray ira a suffering buffering people cry out to have that wrong undone it also speaks of the law as inthe the original steal 9 now will not the same logis by which which the conclusion to reached that citizens are disloyal and ought to bo be franchised disfranchised dis who do not view one act of congress as an essential to morality prove with equal reason that those writers ought to be franchised disfranchised dis who denounce another act of congress as an infamous law if not why not it is generally conceded that all any law requires of the citizen is obedience if he conforms to the law he is entitled to his bis opinion iu in regard tu to it whether that opinion be favorable or unfavorable he may not only think what be pleases about it but may express his thoughts freely he may oppose what lie he deems its weakness or wrongfulness and may work for its repeal nothing lie may say or do about it will bacon be considered beyond the bounds of ofhie his right unless he violates the law oi or assists in its violation instead of showing that he is unfit for the duties aud and of citizenship does not the fact that a man strictly obeys a law which be thinks is unjust or impolitic indicate rather that he is to be considered eminently fit for all the rights and privileges that a citizen can enjoy this is the position usually taken by reason ers on this question but be that as it may it is beyond rational dispute that if non admiration or dissatisfaction with one law of Cou congress gress should disqualify a person as a voter the open denunciation of another law of congress ought to disqualify the objector ob objector lector also and arike the ballot from X liis his rebellious hands handa |
