The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1898-12-07
Roberts and his Wives.

The action Of the next Congress- on
the case of Brigham Il. Roberts, who
has just been elected Representa-
tive from Utah, may be significant as
foreihaeowing the future relations of
the General Government to the Nor
mon Church. While nearly all of
Utah congressman have been Nor
mons, and at present both Senators
and the one Representative are ardent
followers Of that faith, the question
Of polygamy has not been directly
raised since Stateho d was granted.
Cannon, Rawlins and King are Nor
nous, but not polygamists. 1t has
long been charged that this Mr.. Rob
erts is an actual polygamist, and with
that understanding he has been noml-
mated and elected to Congress. Other
polygamists have had seats in Con-
gress from Utah, notably George @.
Cannon, who was Territorial Dele
gate, but when Utah became State
she prom sed in the most impressive
manner to abandon plural marriages
and forever prohibit them within her
borders. These were the terms of the
enabling Act. If, SO soon after these
promises were made, Utah elects a
man to Congress who can be proven
to be a polygamiss, it will certainly
look as if her good behavior agree
ment did not mean much, and may
foreshadow a wholesale rcversion to
polygamy before many years are pass
ed.
In discussing Mr. Roberts right to
a seat in the House the question is:
What can Congress do about it, even
if he is a polygamist? A similar
question might be asked as to the
attitude of Congress toward q general
renewal of polygammy in Utah, in
case it should ever be undertaken.
Representative Cooney, Of the 7th
Missouri District, says that Mr.. Rob
erts was beyond doubt fairly elected
by the people of Utah, and, that being
the case, should not be unseated if he
had thousand wives. Other Repre-
sentatives also announce their inten-
ton of voting against unseating MIR.
Roberts. The Utah man himself says
that the demand Of the American peo
pie, as expressed in the enabling Act,
went no further than this:
s'Perfect tolerance Of religious SEN
timent shall be secured, provided that
polygamous or plural marriages arr
forever prohibited Thus the demand
went 50 far as to prohibit future poly
gamous marriages, but no further
1t thus appears that Roberts makes
the point on future polygamous
marriages, and evidently regards the
continuance of those which had
already been formed at the time Of the
adonfion of the new Constitution as
perfectly proper This is typical
Utah view. By a sort Of common
consent the old polygamous marriages
arc allowed to continue, under some
little disguise, perhaps, but the max
ing Of new contracts Of that sort by
the younger generation is looked upon
as at variance with the agreement OF
the Church. Whether the United
States Government will take this
view of the case in regard to Mr..
Roberts remains to be seen.
Mr.. Dingley is quoted as saying
that the election of a polygamist to
Congress, in the face of Utah's 5 sol
emn pledge, is an afront SO grave that
he thinks the House could not avoid
taking some notice Of it, and if the
charges could be proved might easily
lead to his expulsion from the House.
There is a strong suspicion in many
quarters that the United States has
its real Mormon question yet to meet.
st. Douis Glo6e-Democrdt