The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1890-06-13
AN EXPERIMENT JOURNALIST.

The editor of the Albuquerque On. NJ
Democrat is becoming impertinent, and he
is driving his impertinence into precincts
that are sacred. The first thing he knows
some fellow with a pencil between his
fingers will be popping up and saying he is
disloyal and should be hanged for treason.
The editor, in. a leading article, confesses
that he is not constitutional lawyer, and
because he is not he asks that somebody
who is will give him some information on
certain matters. One point upon which he
desires enlightenment is thus stated: ''If
Congress can disfranchise the Chinese, and
the territory of Idaho can disfranchise the
Mormons, and be sustained in so do
ing by the supreme court of the
United States, what is there to pre-
vent the state of Mississippi from
DISTINGUISHING the colored people? 1t has
been generally supposed that the fifteenth
amendment to the constitution stood in the
way of any act of such character, but
according to the act of Congress in the
Chinese matter, and the decision of the
supreme court in the Idaho case, that is
merely popular delusion, and the fifteenth
amendment like any other provision, con-
stitutional or statutory, Gao be construed
to mean yes or no, according to the ext
gencies of the case, and depending mainly
if not altogether upon whether it is our
bull or yours who is doing the goring.n
We respectfully suggest that such ques-
tions and this style of reasoning will not
do in this republic and in this the final de-
|
lean editors should be content to know
that when the Republican party does a
thing and the Republican supreme court
approves it, the end of discussion has come
and it is treason to ask questions.
Our Albuquerque journalist rushes madly
ahead, however, and persists in PROFOUND
ing ugly and uncomfortable queries regard
ing the exclusion of the Chinese in defiance
of the constitution and in the face of the
national profession of offering safe asylum
to the oppressed of all nations. Turning
again to the Idaho law which seems
to have pleased the federal supreme
court so much, the Democrat man continues
"The Idaho case is even broader in its
terms of discrimination, if such thing bt
possible, than the Chinese act, since it no
only outrages the amendments but dsre
CARDS the very corners stone of the con
stitution-the right of conscience-a RICH
in defense of which our forefathers tool
up arms against Great Britain, and RICH
{ which is not only declared sacred and in
violable by the constitution, but which i
/ asserted in the Declaration of Independ
, ence, and all the fundamental document
of the revolutionary era. The Idaho law i
, clear violation of this right, for it mus
be remembered that it is not limited in it
! scope to those persons who are guilty o
polygamy or other unlawful practices, bu
, applies also to all persons who profess
belief in certain religious tenets And We
this act, which, if its principles were caI
e ried to their legitimate conclusions, woul
result in the establishment of a state re
t ligion, is sustained by the supreme cour
of the United States.n
He concludes by soliciting explanation
from those learned in the law, and by ask
ing lawyers TO say if in the light of th
4 Idaho disfranchlsement law and the Chi
6 4 nese exclusion act, there is anything in til
. con stitution as now construed, to prever
!. any state in the union from passing and CT
u forcing like acts of discrimination agains
Il the people of any race, or of any religion
e denomination.