Show I 1 si ate w I 1 lieO reat ariment of HOD ron fecs le r chamar Cha cr h V during the course of ha his late address before the house judiciary committee against the them new E edmunds d bill HOD hon said the next section provides that any bigamy polygamy ar unlawful cohabitation under any statute of the united states whether before a united states commissioner justice judge e a grand jury ju ra or any court an attachment for any witness may be issued by the court cour judge or commissioner without a previous subpoena compelling the immediate attention lon of such witness when it shall appear to the commissioner justice judge or court as the case cage may be be nat that there Is is reasonable grounds to believe that such witness 15 will a subpoena any man mail who has administered law knows that an instruction to a jury which authorized the jury to find a verdict according to their belief would be held erroneous they must believe from the evidence you donot do not submit controversies in any tiny shape to a mere belief you determine and adjudicate uie controversies that come before courts 0 n evidence and andy any statute that dispenses with evidence in order to come to any conclusion Is vicious for that reason the constitution forbids the arrest of a person except on cause probable cause has been defined so 80 often by our courts that it is understood to bo be composed of evidence there must be an affidavit of the party having of tho subject and then there can only be an arrest preliminary to a hearing the party arrested on probable cause is entitled to a hearing before commitment mit ment this statute docs does tolerate imprisonment without a bearin hearing it contemplates that if the judge thinks bebas lie has good ground for belief not that there Is probable cause not that lie will hear evidence on the pare part of the party against whom this thing Is aimed alme alio iio may bo be present and be e heard and show that there Is nothing g in the suspicion but the party be put in jail and kept there ten days without a hearing it may bo be the husband or the wife cither either now suppose a judge administered this law who felt the zeal zeal requisite for a mancho man who is is appointed to go to the territory of utah and morally purify it and he finds a persecution about to be instituted against the husband he ile belic belie a matter of course that the wife will not appear in that case ho be is authorized zed by this law if it be valid to issue an attachment for tho the woman and keep her in jail for ten days without a hearing and at the end of that time she may runy be discharged the bill says provided that n no 0 person shall bo be held in curdy under i any attachment issued as provided by this section for longer time than ten days and the person attached may at any time secure his or her discharge from custody by exe executing execution cutin a recognizance ac according to that bho may secure b her er release within the ten days she mastbe must be discharged ailt here is the eivan r your a A t P a person in ail Z ten days d ays without any evidence at all 11 without a bearing hearing and upon noth nothing ing except tho the belief of the judge that t the he party will not obey the subpoena Is that justice does that prevail in any civilized community in this world Is it constitutional now in the case with which you arc are all familiar of bradley vs fisher reported in IS 18 wallace the subject of con tempts before courts is gone over very fuell fully bythe supreme courland Cour tand they hold holi that though a court might punish a person for contempt committed in the presence of the court without hearing ithe the evidence yet it is is wise before punishing a person per an for contempt in the presence of the court to give him a hearing hear lne but in all cases of contempt in the presence of the court there is no power to imprison without a hearing the bill does not rt case 0 of f contempt because beca tise there can bo be no conte contempt rapt of the process of the court until issued there can be ho lio failure to observe a process until the process lias bas on an existence and lias has been served thia this statute undertakes to authorize a judge or an officer administering justice in utah to take possession of of the witness and incarcerate him without any process of law whatever A person goes before him hini and says here this party will probably leave the territory unless you issue this attachment tach ment and that may bo bood ground for him to have the belief which Is spoken of the statute has not fixed soy any criterion which shall govern him in tills this matter and therefore he 1 e Is to t 0 O judge what it means and you ur are e a asked s ked to give him power to teke witnesses in a prosecution and confine them without a hearing upon the grounds of belief it Is paid said that bigamy polygamy and unlawful cohabitation are offensive to our civilization and because they are offensive to our civilization this extraordinary and unusual reme dy ought to be permitted ie not an act which takes a mans liberty without due process of law offensive to our civilization Is J our civilization offended in only on 1 particular Is it the crime of bigamy 1 or polygamy alono at which our civilization can be offended if you trample upon our methods of justice and abolish the principles of personal security which wo we have haile built up through centuries it seems to me that such an attack upon pon out our civilization would bo be infinitely more of lu n thou than tho the mere were crime of bigamy imbi Is bigamy more offensive than horse Is bigamy more inore offensive than murder Is it more offensive than treason yet there it i no proposition to chan cliance ge the rule or method metho dof of procedure in any other offense than this single one in the esteem of the law bigamy and polygamy arc gra not ranked as the most depraved offenses cs of the code the tile crime lot murder in the tile opinion of civilization is the graver of lense and yet you yott do not propose to suspend the ordinary method methods of procedure dure in in regard to murder mr stewart ia Is not there this difference fe rence mr chandler in all the crimes which you have mentioned that they are universally recognized aa as crimes by all society of men now suppose you had an organized governia ent where hoisa hoise stealing or any of those crimea crimes which you speak of ofin in an offensive sense were recognized as an institution would you not eay say that r some unusual remedy might be ap all pled there is a that difference b between this crime of polygamy aa as it exists in this territory aad and the nary crimes crime with which humane gov emmetts ero ments deal there is leau all ive er a enl which aa as it is said wd up wold 9 f J jf ala holds and this thing part of their air social system and an they i jand and sustain ervand eathey the aro going ing to stick to it dinow now the direct 4 ye 1 h nyon can come aeto 0 o deal e with I 1 I 1 it ether you arc are justified in ill ausink extraordinary estia ordinary measures that is the point you should argue mr ir chandler that question as the ile exi existence stenLe of an ail organization to commit crime if tho organization bo be euch such as to aake mako the members thereof conspirators then they may be punished as euch such tender tinder the law as it now is see lection revised statutes odthe of the united 6 states tates if the organization include per persons ne who take no cart urt in com in tt lug crime then only those who commit criminal acts can be punished if parties live in a community andaya and sympathize with others who violate v the law such sym sympathy athy does not render them criminally crimin criminally alry liable Ier soca can call only be punished in this country for overt acts sets you cannot reach and sympathy pathy opinion or feeling merel merely ly the cne rae supposed diplo ed by gov gov il IM iun i un i v r bifone if one man esteah it hi 4 neighbor am it 14 rouse he sym path izet ith th latt u who look took the livorse u li iii I 1 i i intimated by the question that thu itsuro worse llian other othet people who iso bigamy am decmia bec tui n e i hey ba b ibave they are right it ma be cub cur ceded weded for the cake bf argument argurn that their belief that they are right does doe snot not protect i them from prosecution but does their sincerity make them than a person er doing ahe same act knowing fi it tto to bo be wrong should the rules rule 3 ot of procedure bo be charred against a people and made harsher than they otherwise would bo be because that people Is honest in doing the forbidden net act the difference beaw between I 1 en biga in in utah and vermont ia in this in atall utah the parties believe they arc are right in vermont they know they are wrong the ordin ordinary arv of justice are to punish the roan who knows lie is is arod wrong al but nary measures are necessary against the honest wrongdoer wrong doer Is an edjor en or in belief more to be punished ahrn intentional tensional tent ional wrong wrongdoing doffid error in belief is not cri criminal per perse se if one who docs does a forbidden ne act t under conviction thai that it 1 4 morally right to do the act is punished ther ifor in n es ex cess of the punishment inflicted upon a aberson person doing a sli nilar act knowing the tile act to bo be wrone wrong such excess of punishment falls upon the honest transgressor because oi of his belief the acts of tho the two are the same some in law but their beliefs are different un under er the theory of this bill the one who is honest in his ills belief must be punished more savagely because of Els bis belief bellef old settled and salutary rules of procedure are to bo be BUSS BUS in his case which the evil minded transgressor assor can invoke these old settled and salutary rules to aft cure to him a fair trial that is the point I 1 am going to argue and I 1 thank the governor for asking the question we WC had a statute in mia gouri where nc we administer the law I 1 suppose as correctly ag as in in any community in athe he world which made it criminal 1 I for f r anybody nobody to aid orabee or abet op 0 thise wit with ithe the rebellion and after the war war when wo we were in a terrible state of excitement a great many arrests were made under that section which condemns sympathy with tho the rebellion and after a protracted str struggle before ono one of the best courts we ever had dif ferine politically with the person ebon t 1 14 IZ I ivic t as no power in the government to punish a man a who did not contribute directly to a specific act forbidden to bo be done and that it waa was not competent to enter the dominion of private feeling or sympathy to punish that alio constitution forbids the ilie idea that because bemuse a certain man belongs to a certain church and a certain other man who vrho steals horses also belong to that church you can pun punish ish I 1 lie church is a cruel pro proposition to make and lias has not in it the lightest lightest lega support |