Salt Lake evening Democrat. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1885-1887, 1885-08-06
ARE THEY THE BEST?


A question that at present Is occupying
the minds of many is that of the Utah
Commission, the utility of its retention or
abolition, and whether the gentlemen
who constitute it are the best qualified Tor
their positions. All know the reason Tor
the institution of the Commission, and
the Commission, like all things else,
should be judged upon its merits, and
rs its merits are so should it be COM
mended or condemned. When it was
instituted in 1882, it was thought that by
the disfranchisement of those voters IN
Utah who were polygamists, that great
reform would be had in the political con-
dition of the Territory, and that the dis
franchisement of large number of poly
gamists would have a tendency to
assimilate politics in Utah to politics in
the Union. To carry out this law,
five Commissioners were appointed.
II was desirable that the gentlemen
who were to compose the Commission
should be eminent, judging that their
eminence in public life would be guar
anty for their efficiency in administering
a law which was at best but an expert
ment. The Edmunds law was radical
measure. and as it aimed at the right OF
suffrage, the dearest and most sacred
right of all in a government based upon
the will Of the people as expressed at the
polls, it should have been strictly con-
strued, and all doubts as to its construc-
ton should have been solved in favor OF
those who were affected by its provisions.
The Utah Commission did the very Oppo-
site of this. Virtually they put an er post
facto construction upon the law, the con-
sequence of which was to disfranchise a
great many who were not living in polyg-
amy at the time the Edmunds law was
passed, and some who had not been in
polygamy since before 1860. A number
of these cases were carried to the
Supreme Court of the United States,
and the construction of the Edmunds law
by the Commission was declared wrong.
The result was the restoration to their
rights OF a great many who had wrong
fully been deprived of them. Here,
then, was the first error OF the Commits
sion. BY their action they had deprived
voters of their rights and thereby intensi-
81 4Io foa1,por Of ,,orSaot1finn which
vades the minds of the majority of the
people of this Territory; and what is
worse still, their very action gave war
rant to the cry of persecution, for the peo-
pie said that the Utah Commission was
exceeding its powers and depriving them
of their rights, and the Supreme Court,
by its reversal of the doings of the Com
mission, confirmed the cry OF the peo-
pie.
The first oath which the Commission
formulated was so searching in its terms
that they found it necessary to withdraw
it and in its place substitute another.
This other and second oath was discarded
owing to the decision OF the Supreme
Court, and in the last instructions
which were given to the Registrars
throughout the Territory the Commission
suggested form of oath to be admins
tered, but leaving the final decision
as to i citizens right to register, to
the discretion of the Registrars them
selves. This is briefly the history of the
doings of the Utah Commission, and we
ask any fair-minded and candid man il
that history does not prove the gentle
men who constitute the Utah Commission
incompetent to discharge the duties of
their office? Their course has been
vacillating and in their construction OF
the oaths they formulated they have been
inconstant, and when their conduct and
administration of the Edmunds law were
reviewed by the highest court known to
the Constitution, they were condemned.
If the Commission is to remain, and ii
probably will, as the chances that the
Legislature will enact any such law in
regard to elections as the Edmunds Act
contemplates are very remote, we believe
that change in the personnel of the
Commission is highly desirable and
would tend to further the object for which
the Edmunds law was enacted, and that il
such change shall be made there are
plenty of men in the community far better
qualified to perform the duties of the
Commission than the gentlemen who
now constitute it. The history of their
career in Utah is their condemnation and
the evidence of their incompetency.