Savannah morning news. [volume] (Savannah) 1868-1887, 1884-01-12

among those clauses the following: .sTbat
no person shall be deprived of life, liberty
or property without due process of law.
that no person shall be held to answer for
capital or other infamous crime unless
on presentment or Indictment of a Grand
jury; that in all criminal trials the
accused snail enjoy the right to
public trial by an Impartial
jury of the State or district
wherein be resides; that he shall be con-
fronted with the witness against him
that he be entitled to be heard BY counsel:
that he shall not be compelled to be a Wit
ness against himself; that no bill Of at
talnder and no eX post factO law shall be
passed.; Mr.. Brown proceeded in detail
1 with the arguments here outlined. He
reviewed the decisions of the courts of
the different States affecting test oaths.
and argued that from those decisions if is
clear that the test oath applied bv the
Otan commissioners, under the Edmunds
ACT, was not in any sense
''due process of law" The act Drescribes
an oath to be taken by men. and if tbev
do not take it that fact alone is taken As
conclusive evidence against them. The
| supreme Court of the United States had
Itself declared test Oaths a nullitv. He
defined bills of attainder and eX post fact0
laws, and argued that exclusion from
ofice OF men who had been polygamists.
but were so no longer, was substantial
attainder, and the various laws relating
to polygamy which provided remedies or
punlshments not contemplated bv law at
the time the pOlygamy was committed as
eX post facto laws. and so unconstitu
tional.
Referring to the question of the right of
congress to destroy the territorial gov
ernment, Mr.. Brown said that if Congress
could do 1t in one Territory it could in all
the Territories, and if the new condition
thus created could last one year it could
last one hundred years, and there was.
CherelOre' nOthlng to prevent Congress
from making OF the Territories satrapies
or provinces to be plundered at will by the
men in power. He could never subscribe
10 the doctrine that the citizens of the
several States who 90 to Utah and aban-
d0n their citizenship in other States should
lose their rights as citizens under an
arbitrary and tyrannical system such as
that recommended by the bill or that of
the Utah Commission. Those people in
Utah are as much citizens of the United
states as citizens of any other part of the
country, and are entitled to equal protec-
ton OF the laws. 1t would hardly do to
punish the 10000 persons of Utah who
were not polygamists, though MOrmons.
IN order TO reach l., 600 who NAV be such.
and II Congress proposed to stamp out
one reugIous sect might it not when that
is done begin on another sect. and
so crush out all the spirit
OF religious liberty? The Christian Church
was the true medium to deal with the
Mormon question. Millions of dollars
are sent yearly to convert the polygamists
OF India and China to Christianity. Some
OF this money spent at home among peo-
pie who speak our language might result
IN producing great change in the posi-
tlon OF the Mormon question. The real
trouble with that problem is that the
Mormons are not as good Republicans as
the leaders of the Republican party would
wish them to be without eXcusing polvg-
amy. Mr.. Brown, i'll conclusion, animad-
Verted severely upon the laXity Of morals
prevailing IN portions of the country out
side OF Utah, and thought much of the
thought and effort expended upon Utah
might well be directed to social evils
nearer home.
Mr.. Garland had always thought Mr..
Edmunds bill for the Utah trouble very
much like prescribing a corn plaster for
consumption, but he hoped that the right
remedy would be found. The Supreme
Court had laid down doctrine that the
people could not shelter themselves from
the consequences Of crime by pleading
requirements of religi n.
The Senate then took up the unfinished
business Of yesterday, being the new
rules, and. after some debate the rules
We're adopted. The Senate then went into
executive session and adjourned till
Monday