Show i I THE IDAHO OATHS t The decision of Chief Justice Hayes of I Idaho that the laws passed by the Idaho I Legislature last winter in regard to elections elec-tions and the qualifications of electors are I constitutional is i somewhat of a surprise I I The laws were pradtically placing a religious II relig-ious test upon electors although they were r HO worded as to save such an L debar all II t 1 appeaiance Practically they believers in polygamy from voting without I with-out regard to whether they are violators l I of any law That the elective franchise I 4 is not one of those inalienable rights i spoken of in the Declaration of Independence t I Independ-ence all know The Supreme Court has j r I held that it is a privilege but not a right I Such being the case no doubt it is on I 1 J t this theory that Chief Justice Hnyes holds that t the Legislature of Idaho can I confer it with whatever qualifications I j and restrictions they may choose Granted that the elective franchise I 1 I is a privilege and not a right still the U t J fact should never be lost sight of that all t American institutions rest upon the exercise 1 i exer-cise of this privilege Such being the I case the aim should rather be to extend than to restrict the elective franchise j 1 and sound policy would dictate that people I peo-ple should never be deprived of it save for some act never for opinions sake In America so rooted has become the idea I I 1 that the elective franchise should be unlimited 5 un-limited and that whenever unqualified a L property qualification for voters has 1 f been suggested it has met with t i such instant and universal condemnation JI I n that it has never been urged at all Even in England the country where property decides upon a mans right to the elective franchise and also his right I to consideration as a man the tendency is constantly in the direction of universal f 1 suffrage regardless of property qualifications I qualifica-tions The Idaho legislation is the very f 4 reverse of this spirit which prevails in I I England and is a reverting to the spirit T of the days of antiCatholic leriplation in J England and is i a revival of the anti I Masonry spirit which once held sway in I I j this country j and such a spirit is always reactionary and detrimental to the cause 1 i which it is sought to further That which I has kept our country BO free from those r I social agitations which frequently occur f in European countries and from breaking j break-ing forth in sanguinary conflicts has been 1 the safety valves of American institutions free speech free press and free actions within the confines of the law In countries coun-tries where repression reigns the stopping up of these valves always produces that low murmur of discontent which when it seeks a vent seeks it in bloody revolutions revolu-tions Nothing so cools the ardor of j 4 r an angry crowd as letting such a > crowd steam and puff and find a vent for t their pent up feelings in inflamatory j speeches and harmless demonstrations i This truth was recently illustrated on the t i occasion of the death of Victor Hugo I when the Communards worked off their f passion in display and not in tho erection 1 I of barricades which would have been il the case had the Government resorted tot to-t the old methods of Louis Napoleon and his predecessors This truth was illustrated I illus-trated in France some years ago when I I universal amnesty was granted to all who had participated in the Communistic I insurrection of 1871 and such men as Uochefort were allowed to return to Paris and preach their wild and revolutionary I doctrines Itocheforl is far more harmless harm-less in Paris than he would be in Geneva I r or Soho Square I But it is said that the Idaho legislation ti while it may be extreme is justified by the fact that polygamy and unlawful cot co-t habitation are becoming so universal and that jMormonism is spreading so fast in the West that something had to be done j I Certainly something must be done when crime is becoming common but the thing to do is to so vigorously enforce i ti the law against the criminals that others r will be detered from committing like crimes Thatt man does uot i hold an act declared a crime by the statute in moral aversion but rather otherwise is not sufficient ground for depriving de-priving him of his vote When he proceeds pro-ceeds from opinion to action then the case is entirely changed and what before may have been moral obtuseness becomes be-comes a crime and should be punished r On the theory that men are a danger toI I society because they hold opinions which if put in practice would boa crime and must be deprived of the elective franchise fran-chise on account of such opinions the question naturally arises How is the State to determine what opinions are clan gerous and what beneficial to the State so long as opinions do not find expression in j action but only exist in tho minds of menThe I men-The legitimate object and the only justi j fication government is to regulate the i j relations of man to man and to so regulate I regu-late them that to each citizen shall be leftt the greatest liberty consistent with tho liberty and rights of every citizen and I not tho regulation of the citizens1 beliefs and opinions The same objection exists to the Idaho test oath that exists to all test cnthf If I citizens are so had as to justify the with i drawal of the elective franchise from I them and tho administration of a test i oath to determine their fitness or unfit i i nesfl then these same citizens will j stultify themselves and subscribe to I the test oath that they may continue i con-tinue to exercise the elective franchise If on the other hand they arc deprived t I < of the right to exercise the elective fran I 1 chise through the imposition of a test I oath to which they will not subscribe and j stultify themselves to continue the exer < iBoofthatTrght then theyare not so J bad as the test oath contemplates them Ito I-to be and their loyalty to truth and the l i I J > observance of the law as declared in the test oath shows them to be fit to participate partici-pate in the government of their affairs A celebraced political writer of the last century has this to say concerning tests Will not he who is so dangerous an enemy that we cannot suffer him nt large discover his enmity by his conduct without reducing us to the painful necessity of tempting him to nn act of prevarication If he be so Bubtile a hypocrite that all our vigilance cannot detect Him will he scruple to add to his other crimes the crime of perjury per-jury It must no doubt be an emergency of no common magnitude that i can justify a people in putting a mark of I I I displeasure upon a man for theopinions he i i entertains be they what they may i AVe will close our article with the same admirable remarks with which the writer referred to closes his chapter entitled i HOf Tests We put a miserable deception upon ourselves I our-selves when we promise ourselves the most favorable effects from the abolition of monarchy i I I mon-archy and aristocracy and retain this wretched system of tests overturning in the apprehensions of mankind at large the fundamental fun-damental distinctions of justice and injustice injus-tice Sincerity is not less essential than equality to the wellbeing of mankind A I government that is perpetually furnishing motives to Jesuitism and hypocrisy is not less abhorrent to right reason than a government govern-ment of orders and hereditary distinction It is not easy to imagine how soon men would become frank explicit in their declarations declara-tions and unreserved in their manners were there no positive institutions inculcating upon them the necessity of falsehood and disguise Nor is it possible for any language to describe the inexhaustible benefits that would arise from the universal practice of sincerity |