The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1899-12-05
ON ROBERTS CASE.


The Republican caucus programme
was carried out. The only variation
from the plan announced the other day
was that the protest entered against
Congressman Roberts by Mr.. Taylor
was not made to the clerk as the roll
was called but to the speaker as he
was about to administer the oath TO
the members.
In stating his objection to Mr.. Roberts
taking the oath Mr.. Taylor said that
the congressman-elect from Utah is
polygamist and an alien. Away down
at the root of this whole opposition is
the fact that b. H. Roberts is a silver
man and Democrat. The popular
objection to him is that he is a polyg-
amist. But this is not a constitutional
or legal objection of which congress
can take cogniZance, 50 the trumpet
up charge that Mr.. Roberts is not
duly naturalized citizen of the United
States was coupled with the other ac-
cusation and presented technical
grounds for refusing to administer the
oath.
What win be done with the case
after the presidents message is dis
posed of is a matter of speculation
Eminent lawyers who desire to see
the congressman-elect from this state
expelled from the body to which
sovereign people sent him as their
representatives Hold that the methods
pursued yesterday the plan agreed
upon at the Republican caucus, are
revolutionary and that the precedent
thus established is exceedingly danger
ops.
Ex-senator Edmunds. one of the
foremost constitutional lawyers of this
country, a statesman, too, whose record
and reputation rest to some. extent
upon his study of and opposition TO
Mormon teachings and practices since
1866, recently published a signed state
ment giving a history of anti-Mormon
legislation, the scope of the state con-
stitution, the limitations OF federal
authority and many points of interest
in considering this case which is tenn
porarily attracting far more attention
than the Filipino war or any other
question before the American people.
To show how far from the law con-
gress swerved in refusing to allow Mr..
Roberts to take his seat and how far
upon the constitutional rights of a
sovereign state his opponents tres
passed, we quote from the ex-senator's
article as follows:
The only condition in the enabling act
was that the Utah Constitutional conVen-
ton should provide by an ordinance. ir-
ravocable without the consent OF the
United States and the people of titan.
that while religious liberty should be
sacred. -polygamous or plural marriages
are forever prohibited.
The constitutional convention held pur-
suant 10 this act adopted an ordinance i'll
the very words of the requirement nave
quoted. and the convention made all the
territorial laws of Utah then in force a
part of the state law.
But in respect to the territorial act of
the 4th OF February, 1892, defining and !
Furnishing polygamy. ETC.. the convention
adopted that act only so far as 1t applied /
which was. following the very words of |
the act of congress. to punish only the |
crime of contracting a polygamous or |
plural marriage. the proof of which. owing 1
to the peculiar methods of the hierarchy, !
II had been found almost impossible to \
make in prosecutions under the acts of /
congress. This difficulty had lesl con- |
gress, in the acts ] nave referred to. to 1
reach the evil by providing for the pun !
ishment Of unlawful coha bitation.
Since the admission of the state. which !
was completed By the presidents procla- /
nation of the 4th OF January 1896. j have /
never heard of any state prosecution in /
respect TO any of the acts related to the 4
subject and it is well understood that
the Mormon hierarchy is in just as COM |
plete possession of the state in all re-
spectS as ii was before the acts of con-
Sress passed in 1857 and 1851 This domln-
alton is not confined 10 matters of re-
ligious belief or worship. but extends to
all the civil and political operations of the
state-a concentration of power in a few
hands which is perhaps without parallel
in any government having a written con-
sticution and protesting 10 be govern
ment OF the people.
g g @
But congress has no right now. says
Mr.. Edmunds, TO step in and under
take the enforcement OF state laws,
while federal enactments were super
seeded by the state constitution. 1T
must be kept in mind" he continues.
that any engagements on the part of
the state of Utah as a condition of its
admission TO the Union relating to the
administration of its internal affairs
would not he binding in point of law.
and could only bind the faith of the
state government, for a breach of which
the only redress must be the forcible
oveTturning Of the state government
which would be simply war; The in
Slant the state was admitted every act
of congress relating to its internal
policy ceased TO have any force what
ever. The consequence is that in point
of law the state of Utah has the same
sovereign rights that any other state
has. She may punish polygamy or I'M
lawful cohabitation. or she may author
ize it. She may declare. as congress
had done. that Legitimate children
shall not inherit, or she may declare,
as she appears TO have done since her
that Legitimate children
shall inherit on an equal footing with
The constitution of Utah
only prohibits the ceremony of making
a polygamous or plural marriage. II
does not prohibit the carrying on OF
relations. Nor do her laws
go any further, so far as / can ascer-
tain In fact she is, as have said.