The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1882-05-25

/ SAou AoOHdEU Al6lD, the pldluLlus LD6n
such relation is presumed to continue;
and it devolves upon the plaintiffs to
| prove to the satisfaction of the jury that
such marriage was legally terminated
before the date Of the marriage certificate
read in evidence, or they cannot re-
cover"
Now, the supreme court of Missouri,
to which the case was appealed, declared
that such was not the law-upon what
principle? Upon the principle have
just enunciated, that the presumption is
every man obeys the law; that where
penal or prOhIbitory law is passed, the
presumption is that everybody obeys it
until the contrary is shown. Besides
even If it be shown that person WAS at
one time violstor of the law, there is 4
tocatS pe1aitentiCg; there is the time for
repentance; so that the presumption Of
innocence, charitsbly founded upon the
experience of ages, and laid down in all
the elementary books, prevails all the
time until the contrary is shown. Here
IS the language Of the su0reme court of
Missouri:
We think the frat instruction whic5
the court gave in this case at the instance
OF the defendants was erroneous. There
was no presumption that q marrisge,
which was proved to have existed at one
time IN Germany, continued to exist
here after positive proof of a second
marriage de Jdcto here. The presump-
ton OF law Is that the conduct of parties
Is IN conformity to law until the contrary
Is shown. That fact continuous in its
nature will be presumed to continue
after its existence is once shown is q pre-
sumption which ought not to be allowed
TO overthrow another presumption of
equal If not greater force in favor Of in
nocence.
The court further says:
''The presumption was that this mar
rage was lawful one, and thai the
former marriage in Germany, if any
such was established, had been dis
solved"
I read further from the language Of the
court;
"There was not any .IeVidenca in this
case, so far sc the bill Of exception
shows, that the first husband OF Mrs.
Klein was still living; but had been
established, we think she was still en-
titled to the benefit Of the favorable pre-
sumption that the first marriage had been
dissolved by divorce, and that il wa
not incumbent on her, in this character
Of action and under the pleadings in this
case, to produce q record Of the judicial
or legislative proceedings by which the
divorce was effected"
Now apply that to this case. A year
ego M Cannon acknowledged that he
was living with plural wives, which
have shown you was then in violation of
no law of Congress whatever; challenge
any gentleman to show that at the time
it was an Ofense against the law. Now
you have passed law making cohabits-
ton with more than one woman q crime.
Why may It not chsritablY be presumed
that Mr.. Cannon as a good citizen obeys
the law as the rest Of US do? That is the
presumption Of the law; and if so, how or
when has it been shown that he has VIC
lated the law?
A good deal of newspaper comment
and hesrssy testimony has been intro
duced here, I want to call attention to
the fact that since the passage Of this law
the small remnant OF polygamy which
before existed in the territory of
Utah is tsat disappearing. The polyg-
ameus relations of parties are being
broken up The Influence of this law Is
operating powerfully upon that people;
for they now understand that if they live
in violation Of this law they are subject
to fine and imprison ment. The presump-
ton is that under the operation of this
law polygamy will cease; that there will
be no mere violations Of the law, and this
presumption applies to Mr.. CslDon's
case.
But gentlemen say that this law Up-
crates against Mr.. Cannon and excludes
him. In what way? There are three
sections applying here. The frat section
defines polygamy and makes it an Of
fense; the third section declares cohsbit-
alton an offense and the eighth section,
referring to those two sections, provides
That no polygamist-
That is, no polygsmist as defined By
this law; the first and third sections can
not refer to any thing else; constituting
the whole statute together, this is the legal
effect of the law aad this Is the Languages:
Sec. 8. That no poIygamist, bigsmist,
or any person cohabiting with more than
one woman, and no woman cohabitlng
with any Of the persons described as
aforesaid in this section, 10 any Territory
or other place over which the United
States have exclusive jurisdiction, she'll
be entitled to vote st any election held IN
any such Territory or other place, or be
eligible for election or appointment to or
be entitled to hold any Office or place Of
public trust, honor, or emOlument In,
under, or for any such Territory or place,
or under the United States.
All the other provisions defring polyg.
amy use the word hereafter" that is
after the passage of the act; and it is in
cumben! upon any one making q charge
to show that the person accused Aas
violated the law since this act went into
operation.
It is said-it has been said by nearly
all the gentlemen who have preceded me
that Mr.. Cannon comes here covered
with crime. and for that reason we can
not admit him. This is the only topic
which I shall have opportunity to con-
slider in the time have remaining. The
proposition is that if a man IS charged
with an offense, it is the duty Of this
House when he makes his appearance
here to exclude him. Now. l think II Is
q principle laid down in the books (ald
the presidents Of the House are ali n
that direction) that although person
may be charged with crime, and even
actually guilty, It is no consideration for
the House upon bis admission to seats
under tie Constitution and the laws. It
may be said that this only applies to
Lnember; but think l have shown that
the law and the constitutional provisions