The Somerset herald. [volume] (Somerset, Pa.) 1870-1936, 1882-11-01
WHOLE NO. 1884.

lygamy.
Cannon had sat as Delegate from
Utah in four previous Congresses,
three of which were Democratic, and
in the last of which Alexander Ham
ilton Coffroth sat with him ior the
whole term, and never raised his
voice against Cannon's right to a
seat.
The falsehood of the Somerset
Democrats article consists in repre-
senting as a vote for polygamy that
which really was nothing of the
kind. A month before the 10th of
April, 1882, the time when the Som
erset Democrat says Gen. Campbell
voted for polygamy, he helped TO
pass bill which would for the fu-
ture prevent Mr.. Cannon, or any
other polygamist, from exercising
the right OF suffrage, being Dele
gate to Congress, or holding any 9TH
er office of trust o. profit under the
United States. The facts In regard
to the vote of April 20, 1882, are
these ; Geo. q. Cannon was elected
delegate to Congress from Utah for
the fifth time In November, 1880,
over A. G. Campbell, by a vote OF
1866 TO 1857. A. G. Campbell con-
tested this election on the ground
that Cannon was not a citizen of the
United States when elected. The
same question had been raised be-
fore, without success, when Cannon
claimed hi. seat in Congress. He
showed conclusively on both occa
sions. that he was naturalized on the
7th of December, 1854.
The resolution on which that vote
was given was as follows:
Re8olred, That George @. Cannon
was duly elected and returned as
Delegate from the Territory of Utah,
and is entitled to a seat as Delegate
in the Forty-seventh Congress.
1t was not a party question, for
both George @. Cannon and A. g.
Campbell were Democrats. Gen.
Campbell voted for this resolution
because Cannon was unquestionably
elected, and showed conclusively
that he was citizen of the United
States and at the time of his cleo
ton, and for eighteen months after
the election, polygamy, under the
laws of the United States, did not
disqualify man from being a mem
Der of Congress. Gen. Campbell
aided in passing the only law evel
passed by Congress making polyga.
mists ineligible to office under the
United States aud depriving them
of the power of voting
He, however, believed that law tC
apply only to the future; he did moi
believe it could 90 back and apply
to the case of a man who was elect
ed eighteen months before it was
passed. The Constitution of tn,
United States has expressly provid
ed that no law can be passed which
goes back and affects cases whiel
originated previous to the passage o
such law. Such an enactment i
, called an er-post tdcto law, and is ex
pressly prohibited by the Constitu
ton of the United States. Genera
, Campbell had the courage OF hi
convictions. That is a characters
j. tic of the man, as all who know hin
: can testify. He had placed himsel
sauarely on the record as being .em
! phatically and unalterably opposes
to poligamy by voting for the Ed
! munds bill at every stage of its pas
sage. But here was the case of ;
man who was elected when polyg
! amy did not disqualify, had ioccupie'
a seat in Congress for eight years be
fore the present Congress, and unde
the law which Gen. Campbell ha
: helped to pass he could never be sen
> back after the present session. Gen
Campbell believed that we, who eS
. pect polygamists to obey the Coz
stitution and the laws, should ODE,
. them ourselves; he believed tina
> under the laws, as they stood whe
. Cannon was elected, he had a righ
> to the seat for the balance of tn
term, and so believing, in obedieEc
to his conscience and his oath, h
= voted for that resolution. Was tha
;. voting for polygamy? In view
Gen. Campbell's votes in favor {
the Edmunds. bill for the suppre:
sion of polygamy at every stage {
! its passage, how can any man VIII
! ! has the slightest regard for truth sa
that was?
But we are not done with thi
e subject. The Somerset Democrc
: fairly bOils over with virtuous indie
!; nation against the men who vote
}. to seat Cannon. Lo use its lar
guage, they voted ''in direct Oppos
! ton to the teachings of the chri'
e tian religion and every principle {
!; common decency.3
1t is hardly worth while to remar
here that. as we understand til
christian religion, it teaches that W
owe moral obligations to all me
, without regard to their religion, p,
> litical views, or moral condition
Gen. Campbell, having put the Sc;
l. of his condemnation on polygam
l, by his vote on the Edmunds bill
i could afford to act conscientiousl
:, toward Cannon, even though he wa
r a polygamist.
!" But when the Somerset Democrc
was using such strong languae
> against Gen. Campbell for voting j
= favor of the Cannon resolution, di
it ever occur to its smart editor tn;
! that there was anybody else WI
voted for that resolution? We wal
to whisper it gently into the ear (
n this editor-and judging from h
'r article We think his earis big enoug
'r to catch the sound-that there wei
others who voted for that resolution
e Yes, there were Democrats who vo
al ed for that resolution. How many
n Seventy eight of them-all in ii
D. same boat with Gen. Campbell 0
it that question-and here are the
b names, as found in the Congression
L. Record for April 19, 1882, pag'
f. 3074 and 3075:
le Aiken, Hoge, Armfeld, Hous
le Atkins, Jones, Geo W.. Barbou
" Tomas l. palyoopt K appa Kin