The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1882-04-28
THE DEBATE.
Continuation Of the Cannon
CampbelI Contest in the
House.

II. George Q. Cannon. contestant, pro
testing that the matter in this paper con
tanned Is not relevant to the issue, d
admit that am a member of the ChuTcl
of Jesus Christ of Latter. Day SAINTS
commonly called Mormons; thst, IN &C
| c0rda0ce with the tenets of laid chu Gu.
/ have taken plural wives, who now .iV
with me, and have so lived with me f.
8 number OF years, and borne ma Chi
dren. also admit that in nv public ad
dresses as teacher of my religion in Utsl
Territory ave defended said tenet o
said cbu'cn as being, in my belief, II V
citation from God
GEORGE Q. CANNON"
Mr.. Hazslton-Now, Mr.. Speaker
that about fuishss the chapter; that con-
cludes, 60 far as my time will permit, 10,
discussion of the power of Congress DYE
this question.
Mr.. Converfe-I would like to ask th,
gentleman the date of the paper which
has just been read.
Mr.. HszeltoD-It was made-I sup
posed the gentleman knew that there had
never b.en any dispute about it
Mr.. Moulton-June l, 1851.
Mr.. Hszslton-It was made for the
pul pOSC Va OOAAk CNl0cuG6 lllb CdSGt u
was never denied by Mr.. Cannon or his
attorney before the committee; it was en-
tereI among the original transcripts,
authenticated the same as Gil the
other papers. 1t stands as Mr..
Csnnon's admission. Does the gentle
man from Ohio Mr.. CJnverse1 stand up
here before the world to deny tnst that is
Mr.. Cannon's belief and position?
Mr.. Converse-I asked the gentleman
a question as to the date.
Mr.. Hazel:on-And l have answered
it.
Mr.. Converse-I did not intend to ex.
cite the gentleman's anger.
Mr.. HsZelton- You did not; more my
BORROW than my anger.
Mr.. Converse-It the gentleman will
give me the date l shall be obliged to
him; if he cannot, let him say so, that is
all.
Mr.. Razelton-I do not think it is
dated as quoted here; it may be in the
original paper.
Mr.. Converse-I want to know when
it was made if the gentleman knows.
Mr.. Hszeioa-It WAS made q part of
the case; but the precise minute when it
was so made cannot tell.
Mr.. COnyerse-Wss it last year, or
FIVE years ego?
M. Haze.ton-It was during the tax
ing of evidence on the naturalization
question.
Mr.. Calkins-Will my colleague on
the comm ttee yield to 10 for moment?
Mr.. Certainly.
Mr.. CslKins-It was stated 10 the srgu-
ment of the case, and not denied, that The
admission was made for the purpose Of
obviatinR the taking of further testimony
on that point. II stands in that way con-
fessed before the committee and before
the House,
Mr.. Converse-I did not ask what hsd
been said about it; asked when it was
made.
Mr.. Calkins-Its date is some time after
the notice of contest was served. II be
date at which il appears in the deposition
is the date.
Mr.. Moulton-Wll the gentleman
from Wisconsin allow me d moment?
Mr.. Hazelton-Certainly.
Mr.. Moulton-The date of that paper,
whatever it may b worth, is the LIST of
June, 1881, about year ago. There is
nothing in the record 10 show for what
purpose or how that paper was thrust
into the record. 1 state this fact to go
Of the statements Of the gentle
nan from Wisconsin, so that there msy
be no misapprehension
Mr.. Calkius-It makes no difference
when it was made. 1t is a fact that it is
1t is quite immaterial when
it Was made or for what purpose. ! he
point is the fact which it dis
closes, not when the paper was made.
Mr.. Hazelton--Uf course if it had ever
been denied or questioned We should
have called Mr.. Cannon before US, and
be would have admitted it all, and more.
l will say thst much for him. l do not
believe he wants any body now TO claim
thst be Is not q representative of the |
church.
Mr.. House-How did the paper get
into the record?
Mr.. Hazolton-How did any of the |
papers get into the record? 1t was part |
Of the record which came before the COM
mittee on elections.
M. Calkins-Sinee the gentleman |
from Tennessee (Mr. House) has chal-
lenRed-
Mr.. House-No, 1 have challenged |
nothing. l ask for information.
Mr.. atkins The only information |
which the committee hsve is that it was |
found in its proper place in the deposi- |
lions on file in this case; and it has never |
been challenged, 90 far as I know, by |
Mr.. Cannon or his counsel; and I have
bsen present at every committee meeting |
on this subject. l have the original in |
my possession; and it is clearly in Mr.. |
Ca mons handwriting. This is the first !
time the paper has been challenged.
Mr. Hszelton-R any one desires TO |
ZEE the original papers, they are in the |
aud this paper il in the |
handwriting of Mr.. Cannon.
Mr. MOulton-Allow me q single mo- /
ment. The paper was not challenged in |
the committee, because the minority of
The committee took the ground, as our |
chairman understands, that it was wholly |
irrelevant to any issue in the case.
Mr.. Calkins-I do not so understand. |
[ only want TO say, so there NAV be no
Misunderstanding between nav colleague
On the committee and mvself that I
never understood Mr.. Cannon or his
counsel 10 challenge the authenticity of
his admission Q: tie purpose for which |
i was made. This is the first time I ever
knew it TO be challenged,
Mr.. Beltzhoover-If the gentleman
from Wisconsin will yield to me for q
would like to make q state
ment.
Mr.. Hazelton-I will. with nla.sure
Mr. beHltznooVer-I can straiRnten this
mater. 30 Tar as | am concerned, Mr..