The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1882-03-02


which protect the life and liberty of the
citizens of the United States. l deny
that Congress can establish a govern
ment in the Territories of the United
States anywhere which shall try and
execute a man without giving him the
benefit of trial by jury under an in
dictment according to the forms of law
which the Constitution has prescribed.
Mr.. Butler-I wish to ask my friend
question in connection with that part
of his argument. Does he believe that
Congress under the Constitution may or
may not impose a qualification for voters
in the TerTitOriesP
Mr.. PendletOn-I believe Congress NAV
impose some qualifications, but no quail
ificatiOn inconsistent with the fifteenth
amendment; and l shall direct some re-
marks / have to make directly to that
very subject.
Mr.. Jones, of Florida wish in that
connection to ask the Senator from Ohio
if he considers the act which l cited
yesterday for the government of the
Territory of Florida unconstitutional
which vested the entire powers of gov
eTnment i'll one or more persons to be
designated by the President and con-
fiTmed by the Senate, including the ju-
dicial and legislative powers of the Ter
ritOTies?
Mr.. Pendleton-I have not had the
statute; do not know exactly what it
provided; but | am prepared to say that
if it vested in two or three hundred peO-
pie the right to control and govern the
Territory of Florida, in any way incOn-
sistent with the provisions of the Con-
stitutiOn of the United States guaran-
teeing the rights of life and personal
liberty and property to the citizens, it
was unconstitutional.
Mr.. Hoar-AIay | ask the honorable
Senator from Ohio question?
Mr.. PendletOn-With pleasure.
Mr. HOar-I desire to ask him if he be-
lieves that Congress- might constitution
ally take away from the lnha6ltants OF
any Territory of the United States all
power of sels-gOvernment whateye", and
might make all the laws, civil and Grim
inal, and appoint officers to execute
them, giving the inhabitants of the Ter
ritOry no voice whatever? Is not that
| exactly what we have done in Terri
| tory acquired? Is it not what we do in
| this DISTRICT If that be true, how can
| the Senator complain if Congress may
cOnstitutionally exercise all the powers
| of government for a Territory and not
allow any voting at all, when instead of
doing that it allows the citizens to vote
on certain conditions?
Mr.. Pendle-On-Mr. President, l have
not vet complained of anything; have
disposed to complain at all of this bill,
OF of any of the provisions of it. | was
defining what l considered to be the eX-
treme limits of the powers of Congress
over the Territories. l am not prepared
to say that | could fix the exact limit
where think Congress ought to allow
to the people of Territory the right of
governing themselves. 1t has been
| done in some cases where those people
reached perhaps six or eight OF ten
| thousand; it has been denied in other
cases until they reached thirty OF forty
thousand. This l say: that the Congress
| of the United States Is bound to afford
| to the people of Territory the OppOrtu-
nifty of elf-gOveTnment within certain
ranges, as soon as it becomes safe and
proper that they shall exercise that
right, in order to prepare the Territories
| to be admitted as new States; and until
such admission, as long as 1t assumes to
control and govern them, 1t Is bound by
the grants and the prohibitions of the
Constitution.
Mr.. Hoar-But are not all the Terri
tories to-day subject to the veto power
of the governors in whose selection the
people have no part and the veto power
of Congress?
Mr.. PendletOn-I do not know that all
of them are. Some of them are; perhaps
all of them, but that suggestion, / sub
Illl, WOulu UOU III any utEiNO ullNNL lllt
argument that | am making as to the
power of Congress at all times, and the
duty of Congress at some time, to remit
to these people the rights of self-gOv-
ernment. | do not find myself bound
in any way at all to antagonlZe the pO-
| sitiOn gentlemen have taken in relation
| to the powers of Congress over the Ter
ritOries. | might differ with them.
do differ with them essentially, but 1t Is
not necessary for my argument that l
| should enter into any discussion with
them upon that subject.
Now, what is the bill before us: 1t Is
a crimes act. The title defines it to be
a bill to amend a clause of the crimes
act. This whole title of the Revised
| Statutes of the United States, of which
section 1852 is part, is the crimes act
of the United States. This bill provides
an amendment to a clause of the crimes
act, and the only amendment that see
| in the first section of this bill is simply
| the introduction of the words "and any
man who hereafter simultaneously or
on the same day marries more than one
woman"
| do not know whether it is found nee
essary in the practice of this Territory
to be so particular as to the time when
the act of the second marriage takes
place. 1t may have been. 1t may be
that they have held that the day was
| but an instant OF llLle, anu IL GnC MAJ
riages took place on the same day 1t was
not subsequent OF a prior marriage,
and therefore it was necessary to intro
duce this provision of the bill. do not
know how that is, and / therefore take
no exception to it. At all events this Is
an addition to the crimes defined in see
tion 1852 of the Revised Statutes, when
is part of the crimes act OF the united
States.
Then section of this bill as original
ly reported, but now section 3, Is
another addition to the crimes act, for
it provides
"That if any male person, in a Terri
tory or other place over which the
United States have exclusive jurisdlc-
tons, hereafter cOhabits with more than
one woman he shall be deemed guilty of
a misdemeanOr."
l do not know the exact state of the
law on this subject, but l suppose that
the crime heretofore defined is cOhablt-
ing with any other woman than his
yvifn and that this section of the Dill Is