Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1890-01-29
A HUGE STEAL
Sought to be Psrpetrated By
the Liberal Party.
THE REGISTRATION OFFICERS
Override the Utah Commission,
Judge Zane, and the
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT

UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT
In the Plot 90 Rob the Majority a
the Next Election
No doubt exists in the minds o
the public ne to the fact that Their,
isa stupendOus scheme on the par
Of the ''LIberals'' TO gain the elec
ton on February 10 by any mean.
at their command. And as there 4
no prospect of doing 1t fairly, therC
is no hesitancy in adopting fou
play.
This is plainly apparent from the
fraudulent names on the registration
lists, tie wholesale challenging o.
those known to lie Peoples Party
votets, the rulings Of the registrars,
and a dozen other actions Of the
party which manipulatesthe election
machinery.
But the trickery.has been so elose'
Iy watched by the Peoples Party,
who are eontending for their rights,
that in order to accomplish their
base purposes, the most shameless
and barefaeed disregard Of right has
10 he exhibited, atd this seems 70 be
doue without the least conipuneuen,
while at the same time the Perpetra-
! tors keep dHclstlHs ''wa want TO do
what is right,'' ave want to 10,
fair" etc; but whatever they may
profess to want, their actions are
sufficient to show what they are
really after.
"we've sent out more than T00
challenges already, and more are
going, . was the statement made to-
day. or this number 81 are in the
First Pteeinsti The, FifIt Precinct
has the least, while the other thtee
are about equal. The new notices
that are going out seem to be
chiefly in the Second Precinct, and
are made returI'sbls before Registrar
McCallum.
In the proceedings before Regis
trars McCallum, Morris and Winters
today, when the persons challenged
were called and required TO be
sworn, without even the oppOrtu-
nifty Of being confronted 10y the
challenger, the Peoples attorneys
objected 10 that order, and cited the
ruling Of the Utah Commission that
the burden OF proof should bs on
the objectors.
But that did not suit the purpose
OF the registrars, so the opinion Of
the Utah Commission was 'taken
under advisenent."
The challenged parties were COM
PEELED 10 proceed under the old order.
Thus the Utah Commission was
Jvernulrd
Then AIessrs. Powers and Dickson
appeared for the Liberal" party
and ''argued'' the case, or rather
stated what they wanted, and they
got it, the proceedings going on
in the same order.
Before Registrars McCallum and
Morris the order Of questions was
about the same rs yesterday, the
great bulk being ''tsLen under adj
visement."
Those who were called before
Registrar Winters were somewhat
annoyed by the insOlent tone In
which the registrar asked his ques-
tons. Some concluded that he did
not know any better; hut he does,
and can be very mild and gentle at
times.
Ina general way his line Of ques
tioning was on the matter OF the
challenge, and those whose resi-
dence in the city dated back less
than n year were given n rigid eN-
animation. and their cases ''taken
under advisement."
In regard To citizenship, the fol-
lowing are sampleSi
A Mr.. Peterson said he was four
years old when he came 10 the
country, and had never himself been
naturalized.
Reglstrar-Your name will be
stricken from the list.
The attorney for the Peoples
Party inquired whether Mr.. Peter
son's,father had been naturalized
before the son was OF age.
ooh, yes" replied Mr.. Peterson.
Registrar - Well, that will he
taken under advisement.
Richard 5myth was horn in Dub
lin. His father was an American
citizen, and his parents had gone
TO Ireland to see about some prop
erty which his mother was heir To.
In the Third District Court Mr..
Smyth had been informed that he
was a citizen under these circum-
stances. He had also seen his
fathers naturalization papers when
he was n small boy, and remembered
that they were issued in Lowell,
Massachusetts,. His father had
served In the American navy.
These facts he could PROVE by wit
nesses now in the Territory.
The registrar said that the natu-
ralizatlon Of Mr.. Smyth's father was
a matter of record, and c0uli only
be proved that way. He told Mr..
Smyth to get copy of the record,
and took the case ''under advise
ment."
The next case that came up, how
ever, takes the premium. IL was
that Of Henry Puzey, Of the Twen-
tieth Ward.
Mr.. Puzey testified, in effect-I
am not a polygamist 1.-THE ground Of
challenger; have never been
n practical POlygamist, though
have had two wives. My
first left me, and atterward,
in 1865, without getting a divorce, |
married again. In a few years the
first wife died, and learning my
status under the law, | made the
second wife my legal wife by marry
ing AGAIN. / have never been con-
victed OF pUlygairy, end never lived
with two wives; have never Deen
amnestied.
Registrar Winters--I may as well
decide this and all other like cases
right now. Mr.. Puzey is objected
to on the ground that he is polyg-
amist. The law Of 1862 says:
"That eyer5 person having husband or
wife living. who shall marry any other per
son, whether married or single. In Terri
tory OF the Upittd states, or other place
over whieh the United States have eti
elusive jurisdiction, shall be
GdiEdged guilty. Of polygamy.
Provided, nevertheless, that this section
shall not extend 10 any person BY reason OF
any former marriage whose hus-
band or wife by such marriage shall
have been abtent for five successive
years without being known 10 such
person wlihiu that time 10 be living; nor 10
any person by feai5n q aiif fc-me- rrar-
rage which shall have been dissolved By
the decree OF a c mpetent court: nor 10 any
person by reason Of any former marriage
which shall have been Annuled or pro
nOunced void BY the sentence or decree OF
a competent court 90 the ground Of the