The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1882-05-13
THE DEBATE.
Continuation of the Cannon
Campbell Contest in the
House.
Jones' Argument.

| \ ON'StHCOCU JIOHS IT CNU9 OUCtS'
This is no new question in America
history. George III and the BIRTHS
Parliament thought that our father
when they we're living under colonis
and charter governments had no right
beyond their will. But Jefferson an
Madison and Washington and others o
our early fathers believed and main
tanned that men are born with inGlienaol
| rights, of which they cannot be deprived
| by the usurpStioh of their rulers.
This. then, is not new question. L
was before Congress in the act organizing
the Territory of Utah. Congress incur
porAted into that act no disqualification
rs 10 polyRamy. They recognized Ii,
! FACT then that there was in Congress ar
absolute want Of power to do so.- They
organized the ooly government, ID so fal
as this particular feature of the case il
concerned, that 10 their judgment they
had the power 10 organize. They recog
nized the people as having rights TO life,
liberty, and property.
Yet gentlemen here would tell US t5ai
they have none; that we can tax them
without representation; that we can deny
them representation on this floor. We
are told that delegates represent nobody
here; that they amount 10 nothing; that
they cannot vote. Granted; but have
we Rs Americans yet to learn The potency
Of the right to speak. the power of the
voice of representative who speaks for
his people? Do not gentlemen recognize
the fact that it is the bulwark of our in
stitutions that the people, whether OF
state or territory, may bring their cause
here, and if not heard, then by way of
appeal they can 60 from Congress to the
grand tribunal Of the whole people of the
United States? Yet you would deny
them that right lest in asserting their own
rights they might forsooth reproach you
for their violation. Congress did not in
corporate into the organic act any such
provisions as are now insisted upon.
Take the Forty-third, the Forty
fourth. the Forty-ffth, and the Forty
sixth Congresses; at times republican
and at times democratic. Yet the right
of this people to be represented by q
Mormon was recognized by all. Now,
we are told that the presence of Nor
mon on this floor will offend the dignity
and sensi5ilIties of certain men and
women living elsewhere; hence, we must
Commence crusade against Mormonism.
Gentlemen, are you in earnest in that?
It ls said that you may judge tree by its
fruit. Now, If you are In earnest and
really want to extirpste polygsmy, the
way is essy and the constitutional method
is plaiG. What is that? Why. Just
gather together thirty or forty thousand
ofyou and 90 out there and settle. They
cannot hinder you from doing go, and
then you can settle this question.
The Forty-third Congress had this
question before it, and the Forty-fourth
Congress and the FOrty-ffth and the
Forty-sixth. 1t has passed the crucial
test of all of them in constitutional point
Of view, and they sll decide that there
was then no existing law, no such dis
qualification as polygamy as now con-
tended for by gentlemen on the opposite
side of this question. Congress by &C
quiescing, by receiving the delegate, is
now, If there can be aDy such thing upon
the unbridled power claimed by this Con-
gress, estopped from interposing and ex
acting for the first time 3 qualification
hitherto unknown either to the Constitu-
ton, to the law, or to precedent.
The present Congress admits that; there
is no question en- that subject. Why
hurry through in hot haste at the present
Congress what is known "a the Mormon
bill, except to reach Mr.. Csanon's cssef
Every body knows that. You admit that
the law and the Constitution sustained
floor. And in order to overreach him
Mormon bill, and passed it in order TO
accomplish by iL1irect means what you
could not effect directly Now, is there
L. I
that what cancot be accomplished
directly cannot be accomplished in.
directly? Can you eVade, and thereby
defeat the Consultation Of the country?
It is maintained by some gentlemen
that this act OF this Congress changes ma
teriRlly the attitude of the case. 1t is
maintained by the gentleman from Penn
sylvaniR Mr.. BeltzhOoYer] that for the
first time we have polygAmy confessed By
Mr.. Cannon. Now, does not every body
know thst it was just as well known by
general notoriety as q thing could be
known? Did Mr.. Cannon ever deny it
heretofore2 And now because the man
was too honest, TOO frank, to deny the
truth, but came up boldly in his man
hood and admitted il, did not put the
country to any trouble to prove it, That
is seized upon as conclusive evidence Of
guilt.
Now, was he guilty of any ofense, any
legal otense? I will inquire about that
by and by. He had taken his wives be-
fore the act Of 1862.
Mr.. Beltzhoover-Will the gentleman
allow me to ask him a question?
Mr.. Jones, Of Texss-Certainly.
Mr.. Beltzhoover-Hss the gentleman
ever read the report Of the committee on
elections of the Forty-third Congress in
the Cannon and Maxwell case?
MIR. Jones, of Texss-No, sir, I have
not.
Mr.. Beitzhoover-Then 1 would sug-
gest that the gentleman should not make
the assertion that Mr.. Cannon did not
deny that he was polggsmist.
Mr.. Jones, of Texas-I say that he did
not deny it then.
Mr.. Beltzhoover-He did deny it.
Mr.. Jones, of Texas. Denied that he
ever had been married?
Mr.. Beltzhoover. In the contest which |
Mr.. Cannon had with Mr.. Maxwell, in |
the Forty-third Congress, (1674,) he de-
MED most emphaticslly that he was
''living with four wives or living or CO.
habiting with any wives in defiant or
wilful violation of the law of Congress
of 1862" He denied that he was then
'living, or bad ever lived, in violation
of the laws Of God, man, his country.