Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1890-04-29
THE DISFRANCHIsEMENT MEAS
IRE.

THE House Committee on Terri
tories have agreed, by a strict party
vote, TO report favorably the hill
providing for the disfranchisement
Of the Latter-day Saints Of Utah.
Mr. Saunders, of the Utah Com
mission, when he appeared before
the committee, made a laundering
admission. It was TO the effect that
the need for this additional legisla-
ton existed in the fact that the
Edmunts-Tucker statute failed to
produce a serious split in the PEG
pies Party. 1t was hoped the ''SIor-
mons" would break up politically
and vote largely with the ''Liberals.'
Instead Of doing this they voted al
most solidly together. In order to
wipe out such a disagreeable element
Of opposition more effective legisla-
ton was needed. The wholesale
method was the most desirable-the
passage Of n law that would ex-
tinguish the entire vote Of the
SAIormOns."
That is about the substance Of Mr..
SAUNDERS plea. 1t is an astounding
one. 1t Is a new theory in the poll
ties Of n republic. When the vote
OF a party becomes troublesome to
the opposition Gisfranchise its
members. The gentleman told the
truth as TO the reason for the pro-
posed law, but in blunuy announc-
ing it he manifested an absence of
adroitness that was somewhat trou-
blesome 70 his own kind.
In its report on the measure it
appears that the committee, recon-
mendiug its passage, urges as a rea-
son that ''No religious right is in
vaIei 10y the biIl.''
In the light Of the proceedings Of
the committee nothing could be
more shamefully false or exhibit
more efronteEy than such a gauzy
claim. This can readily be shown
10y the treatment accorded an
amendment on this point offered by
1Ir. Springer. 1t was as follows:
Provided, that no person shall be
deprived Of the right to vote, hold Of
fee or sit on a jury on account of his
religious belief or opinions
This was rejected on a strict party
vote. Mr.. Springer's amendment
was a negative proposition; oonse-
quentiy the action Of the majority
OF the committee was the afiirma-
tive Of it and meant this:
Provided, that a person shall be
deprived Of the right to vote, hold Of
fee or sit on a jury on account Of his
religions belief or opinions"
Actions are more forcible than
words, therefore the language Of the
report made by the committee dis
claiming an invasion Of religious
righ. is 50 much fiatulency, when
placed alongside Of the fact Of the
crushing Of the protective profered
amendment anu the assault on the
rish. Of religion in the measure it
SELF
90 constitutional objection can
be urged to is Eassage,'' Is another /
proposition Of the committee. That /
is = most unphilosophical way OF /
getting rid Of an important political 1
problem. Perhaps the assertion may,
however, be considered correct ac-
c0riing 10 the recently announced !
status Of the constitution rs defined |
by distinguished senatoT-.he will |
Of the majority. Take the instru-
meut As it stands, however, and no |
measure that could ever be offered /
could be more properly OF power
fully objected to On constitutional /
grounds. The inhibition against |
ta-@ ~ 1lAAAtAAAhAA VI AGltE luAS tests 10 !
decide qualifications for voting OF
holding Office is strong enough and !
sufficiently weighty to grind the bill !
to atoms if it were directed against !
it. Bat It is getting common
now TO regard the Constitution as
a relic Of antiquity that ought to
be discarded or placed in 4 museum
Is pointer backward to old times /
when men had not sufficient sense |
10 frame an organic act that would, |
when acted upon, preserve for all |
time the freedom and rights Of the 1
people against the onslaughts Of ty-
rants.
II these invasions Of the funda- |
mental law Of the country continue |
the nation win soon be in the posi-
ton Of the consumptive patient who, |
when asked the question, GLOW is
your constitution?'' replied. 'Its
gone, hut I'm getting along the
best can on the bylaws