The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1890-05-21


further demand for information, to DO an-
swered truthfully under penalty OF 500 for
refusal as to the amount he owes on mort
gage, judgment note, confession OF judg-
ment. or crop lien, the value Of the mort
gagged property, the rate OF interest, and the
causes and purposes Of the indebtedness.
This last proposition would be incredible
II we had 1t not In black and white In tho
Census Commissioners official announce
ment Tho Government proposes, for the
supposed benefit Of statistical science. and
without the shadow OF constitutional right, to
force the citizen to disclose not only the
amount OF his private indebtedness, but also
his private reasons for getting into debt 1t
appears that for the sake OF practice In this
outrageous function, the Census Bureau has
been conducting what 1t calls experimental
inquiries !" in Cattaraugus county, in this
State, as well as in Iowa and Massachusetts.
The scope and impudence OF the In
curry as to the causes OF Indebtedness
are sufficiently indicated by the preliminary
results in Cattaraugus. The agent reports
that fourteen per cent. of all the mortgage
indebtedness which he investigated was due
to extravaganza" and eight per cent. to
speculation" and. apparently with
facetious intention he adds that among the
"curious and interesting results" OF his
quest he finds that one home was mortgaged
Ito secure payment for 675 gallons OF reoti-
fled whiskey;" another, to raise money FOR
trip to Sweden" and third to pay SUBJ
scription for preacher"
Did ever a free Government, we ask, pro-
pose n more outrageous violation OF the
Constitutional rights Of q sovereign people
1t must be remem bered that these un1ust-
fable inquiries are pushed with threats OF
prosecution. The woman who hesitates to
disclose the secret Of the cancer In her
breast, the debtor who may reply that 1t is
no business Of the Federal Government to
know whether he mortgaged his house to
pay a church subscription or to buy whiskey,
will alike be informed that to refuse an an
swer is misdemeanor for which he or she
can be indicted, tried, and convicted In the
United States courts; that the penalty upon
conviction is q fine up to 500. or imprison-
ment unless the fine is paid. Such ts the law
passed by the last Congress.
That law contained an unprecedented pro-
vision giving to the Secretary Of the Interior
practically meaning the Census Commits
inquiry" with power to change the subject
matter, amend or modify tho schedules Of
the previous census. That is, Congress COM
mitted to an executive officer indefinite au-
thority to frame the questions; and Mt the
same time it provided that refusal to an
swer the questions not yet framed should
DO misdemeanor, punishable through in
dictment. This extraordinary legislation
passed the House on July II, 1888, at time
when no quorum was present. The last
division of the House previous to the pas
sage of the bill itself revealed three affirma-
two and nine negative votes; that is, twelve
Representatives present and voting out OF a
House OF 325 members! Attention had been
called by Mr.. ATKINSON Of Pennsylvania to
the lack Of quorum, but he withdrew his
point at the personal request Of the late Mr..
Cox, on the ground that II it were pressed.
the bill would have no chance to pass.
Better that it should not have passed. 1t
is disgrace to tho Congress that passed it.
It is disgrace to the Democratic majority
that, with criminal negligence, permitted it
to go through to enactment without pro-
test against its shameful violation OF the
vital principle of Democracy: the right Of
tho citizen to live his life and conduct his
affairs without any interference from the
Federal Government other than is war;
ranted by the Constitution.
If there should be an attempt to punish
any woman for refusing to disclose to the
census enumerator her physical ailments,
or to punish any man for refusing to COM
municate his private reasons for mortgaging
his home, we have not the slightest doubt
as to what the result would be when the
question Of the constitutionality Of the CEN
sus law reached the Supreme Court OF the
United States. Meanwhile Congress is in
session, and the Democrat who from his
place in the Senate or the House, shall
call the attention OF the country to the true
character of the outrage which the Census
Bureau intends to perpetrate, will earn
very enviable reputation as a defender Of
the Constitution and Of the rights Of the
free American citizen.