The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1882-05-13

errors, or whatever you please 70 term
them, all took place before the enact
ment Of the law OF 1862. Will any
gentleman pretend tat Mr.. Cannon
could under that law be convicted and
punished for an act which when done
was not crime?
The gentleman from Pennsylvania
(Mr. Beltzhoover) says there is nothing
that Congress cannot do in its treatment
OF the people OF the territories. But it
seems 10 me- that on this point he hiss
read to very little profit the decisions of
the Supreme Court if ne has not been in
formed that, with all our legislative
power, We cannot, TO s.ve our lives.
make law &c post Jdcte in its nature
or even impairing the obligation of con-
tracts. In the celebrated case of Hem
burn Us. Griswold, involving the legal
tender question: case with which MEM
bers Of the bar are all familiar-tbe
Chief-Just ce, delivering the opinion of
the court. grouped not the powers of the
government in order to show that it could
do thus and so, but actuslly grouped the
inhibitions by the Constitution upoa the
powers of the states for what purpose?
To how that by the very nature and
genius of our govern meDt &c post Idcto
laws and laws lmpairing the obligations
Of contracts have no part or pisce in our
entire system. The federal government
cannot exercise the power to pass any
such law. There is no authority, either
state or national, that can By an act
passed to-day mske that which was done
yesterday crime.
The eighth section of the act of March
", 1882, has been referred to. Let me
read it:
''Thst no polygamist, bigamist, or any
person cohRbiting with more than one
woman, and no woman cohsbiting with
any Of the persons described rs aforesaid
IN this section, in any territory or other
place over which the United States have
exclusive jurisdiction, shall be entitled TO
vote"
That does not affect votes heretofore
given
sat any election held in any such terri
tory or other place"
Not heretofore but hereafter held in
such territory or other p ace
cor be eligible for election or appoint
ment to-"
Not in the past, but in the future
'or be entitled to hold any office or place
OF pu bic trust, honor, or emolument in,
under or for any such territory or place,
or under the United States"
Now, in constituting this provision l |
submit that the general and well-known |
rule that all statutes are to be construed |
so as to give them operation in the future,
applies in this case. No statute can be |
construed as having . retroactive or &c
post fGcto effect, even where there exists |
power in the legislative body to give it |
such efsct, unless it be made so by ex-
press and unm stskable language. Now,
apply that rule to this eighth section,
which, it is claimed, works a change IN
the character that this case presents to US.
Under the application of this rule The
whole argument falls to the ground.
But, accepting the confession which
this argument implies of your inability TO
reach this case in other mode, let US con-
cede That the law makers intended to do
Just what you claim BIAS been done-to
reach Mr.. Cannon and impo:e upon him
3 disqu4lifcs, ion on account of polyg-
amy: en- you do it? Have you one II?
Is not the law. If So construed, necessar-
ly &c post fGctO? Was not Mr.. Cannon
duly erected to this Congress? Did he
not acquire by virtue Of his election
vested right Of property in his Office?
Can you deprive him OF it,except by due
process Of laN? Is it true, as you affirm.
hat the people residing in tn territories
have no protection whatever? Is it true,
As you affirm, shat the %gis Of American
liberty does not cover those poor, helpless
people out there? Is it true, as you
maintsin. that when q man, invested il
MS own state with all the rights of Amer
can citizenship, happens to transcend the
territorial borders Of the state sovereignty
ne loses his stature as man and fOrfeits
MS rights as an American citizen? Why,
lir, this idea reverses the who.e theory of
our government. Our fathers thought
hat the governments were organized to
conserve and protect the innate. inherent
lights of man; yet you reverse that prin-
'iple, and in these halls, familiar In the
,ast with the teachings Of Douglas and
clay and other illustrious men, you
;-avely tell US that the people Of the ter
itories have no rights whatever that we
ire bound to respect. Why, gentlemen,
We are retrograding; we have got away
Jack of 1906.
To be continued.