The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1890-04-08
THE IDAHO OUTRAGE.

A number of the newspapers of the
country, especially those of Democratic
leanings, are taking up the Idaho admis
sion matter, and discussing it much in the
manner that the bill was discussed in the
House of Representatives the other day.
The clearest statement of the case that we
have yet seen is an editorial in the Chicago
Times, which presents the matter with such
convincing logic that one wonders that
anybody who has regard for justice, right
and law can approve the outrage which is
proposed in the admission of Idaho with its
nnrepublican constitution, We publish
the Times editorial in full:
1.-The population of Idaho in 1850 was 49,
$40. The vote of Idaho in 1883 was 16,0l3.
1t is probable, therefore, that the present
population CT the territory is from so, 600 TO
100000. The Republican majority in 1883
Was 1,747. A Republican Congress which
saw three additional votes in the electoral
college of 1892 by the admission of Wyo-
ming sees three more by the admission of
Idaho. New Mexico exceeds either in pop
alation, area and wealth, but Republican
Congress has no use for Democratic ter
ritory, wherefore New Mexico must be
ignored, while Wyoming and Idaho are
pushed to the front
''The Republican House approves con-
stitution for Wyoming containing clause
for woman suffrage. The policy of this
proceeding will not be greatly questioned.
If Wyoming wants woman suffrage there
Is no reason why the nation should not
respect its preference. The apportion-
ment of Congressman is made not upon the
basis of the elector but upon thatof popula-
ton, and Wyoming would gain no dispro
portioned advantage by its peculiar enact
ment as to suffrage. But Idaho in its con-
stitution proposes monstrous injustice,
totally at variance with the spirit of
religious liberty and even the letter of the
federal constitution. All states aim to dis
franchise convicted felons, and in
SO far as polygamists are felons
1t Is proper to disfranchise them
when their offense is notorious.
even if they have not been convicted.
The Mormon as polygamist may be con-
demned to outer political darkness, but the
Mormon who is not polygamist but is
much entitled to the exercise of all privi
leges Of citizen as a Methodist, a Catho-
lie, Lutheran, a Jew, CT the professor of
any other religion. The states ought not
TO go the states do not 20, into any inquiry
touching an electors religious belief. The
states do net, and they ought not assume
to discriminate between church beliefs.
The vice of the Idaho constitution is that
it DISTINGUISHES Mormon merely as such.
He may be unmarried, he may be a mo-
nogamist, he may refuse-as many Nor
mons do-to have plurality of wives, but
he is marked for Acknowledgement upon
the sole ground of his membership in the
Mormon church. This is monstrous per
version of the spirit Of religious liberty.
Congress-" says the constitution, s'shall
make no law respecting an establishment
Of religion or prohibiting the free exercise
thereof" To disfranchise wholesale, as is
proposed in the Idaho constitution, all the
men belonging to particular church is
very materially to intrench upon the free
exercise of religion. 1t is a crime against
liberty. The Mormon has as much right
to worship God in his own way as the
Presbyterian [has. The non-polygamous
Mormon has equal rights of citizenship
with the non-polygamous Spiritualist. or
infdel, or MussHlman
at adds to the enormity of the outrage
proposed in Idaho and sanctioned by vote
Of the Republicans in Congress that this
invasion of the right of private opinion
upon religious questions is attempted, NOT
from any high, if mistaken, motive. but
solely through desire to silence at the polls
a class of men who it is feared might vote
against Republicans. A great principle of
liberty, mighty in its beneficence, is to be
assailed, its beatifc symmetry is to be de-
stroyed merely to bolster Republicanism
in Idaho and make certain Of three elec-
toral votes for the Republican party in
1892.
''The Democrats in the House of Repre-
sentatives opposed this monstrous plan IN
the utmost of their power, compelling
finally the arbitrary counting of a quorum
In order to enable the speaker to declare
the bill passed. Their purpose is to pre-
sent the subiect-matter to the supreme
court for an opinion upon the power of
the house to go behind the roll call for
quorum. There ought to be an opinion
from this court on the suficiency of the
DISTINGUISHING clause in the Idaho consti-
tuition"