The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1882-05-17
THE DEBATE.
Confirmation of the Can non
CampbeII Contest in {
House.
Jacobs Argument.

Introduction of proof before the notary;
and MT having asked TO be relieved from
his default, We are brought to the IN.
qulry, was the contestant at the time OF
his election an alien? Upon this question
l adopt the reasoning Of the chairman,
and hold that the judgment Of naturnll-
cation cannot be attacked colIateraliy,
and in conclusion, constrained as L am
by my views Of the principles OF cohstruc-
ton to hold that George z cannon was
At the time of the election citizen OF the
United States, and received the greatest
mum Der OF votes cast, l am, nevertheless,
OF the opinion that this committee should
not recommend, and the House ought to
refuse TO admit, the said Cannon to 4
seat as a delegate from the Territory of
Utah, for the reason that, in defiance Of
the laws of Congress and the sense Of
mankind, he is living in open adultery
with plural wives, and advocating the
doctrines and practice of pOIygsmy.
And so, seeking the shelter Of no sub
terfuge or techhicality, stand on this
proposition for the dignity and honor Of
the House
and now that we have cut loose from
and disposed Of every preliminary ques-
ton in the contestants favor, We are
br ,uebt face TO face with the last and
only ground upon which his claim to q
seat can be rightfully rejected. An this
issue upon which the report of the COM
mittee must, I think, stand or fall is best
formulated in the published declaration
Of the contestant himself, on page 50 Of
the record, and is as follows;
In the matter of George @. Cannon.
Contest of Allen q. Csmpbelf's right
to q seat in the House of Representa-
tives Of the Forty-seVenth Congress Of
the United States, as delegate from the
Territory of Utah.
I, George O. Cannon, contestant, pro-
testing that the matter sn this paper con-
tanned is not relevaIt to the issue, do adj
NIT thai am q member of the Church
Of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints,
commonly called Mormons; that 10 ac-
cordance with the tenets of said church l
have taken plural wives, who now live
with me, and have so lived with noe for
number of years and borne me children.
I also admit that IN my public addresses
as teacher of my religion in Utah terri
tory l have defended said tenet Of said
church as being, in my belief, revela-
ton from God. GEO. Q. CANNON.
to determine is. 'Are the matters in that
paper contained relevant to the issue "
and do they constitute q valid reason
why George Q. Cannon, after having
been duly elected delegate from the
territory of Utah, should be refused
seat in the American Congress? In other
words, does the fact that be is a member
of the Church Of Jesus Christ of Lat
ter-day Saints" commonly called 81 or
mons; that, in accordance with the tenets
of such church, he hiss taken plural
wives, who now live with him, and have
so lived with him for q number OF years,
and borne him children; that in his pub
lie addresses SIS teacher of that religion
he has defended such tenets as being, in
his belief, a revelation from God-are
these facts relevant to the issue, and do
they constitute valid reason for his ex-
clusion2
Let US pause right here to consider the
objection raised before this committee
and by the gentleman from Tennessee
yesterday, that inssmueh as it does not
affirmatively appear by the terms of the
admission that any Of these wives were
taken subse quent TO the act Of 1862. de-
claring polygamy crime, that therefore
the confession does not bring the con-
testant within the penalties prescribed by
the act.
A technical reply to technical objec-
ton is fair, and my answer is that the
contestant, having confessed the truth of
the facts constituting the ofense of polyg-
amy under the act was bound 10 plead
the facts which, by way OF avoidance,
take tie case out Of the operation of the
statute.
So that on the record made by himself
he cannot now avail himself OF that OBJ
lection.
In the first place, insist that the posi-
ton taken by the chairman in the report
of the majority is sound; that while the
House Of Representatives may not disre-
gard lew which Congress has the coz
stitutional right to pass, and that while
Congress is competent to provide, under
the Constitution, for legislative represen-
tstion for the territories; that, neverthe-
less, Congress cannot bind the House by
any law representing the qualification of
a delegate.
1 cannot better state the position than
to employ his language:
SIT (Congress) cannot afix a qualifca-
ton by law for delegate and bind any
House except the one asserting thereto.
The justification of members is fixed by
the Constitution. Hence they may not
be added to or taken from by law. But
as to delegates, they are not constitu-
tionsl officers. Their qualification de-
ponds entirely upon such standard as
the body to which they are attached may
make. It is urged this means legal
qualification. This is admitted; but that
legal qualification is RENTED to the body
to which the delegate is attached, because
it is the sole judge Of that requisite. 1t is
unfette- / by constitutional restrictions, |
and cannot yield any part of this pre-
rogstive 70 the other branch of Congress
or the Executive. If il could, the right !
to amend would follow, and the House
might find itself in the awkward position |
of having the Senate fixing the qualifca- |
tions to delegates, or the Executive veto |
inp laws fixing them, and by this means
the power which by the Constitution |
resides slone in the House would be en-
tirely abrogated.
It is claimed this is an sutocratic |
power. This is admitted. All legislative |
bodies sre autocratic in their powers, un-
less restricted by written constitutions. |
In this instance there is no restriction.
It is commended that tie act of Congress |
extending the Constitution and laws OF
the United States over the Territory of
Utah, i'll all cases where they are spplica-
bic, extends the constitutional privilege
to delegates and clothes them with mem