Akron daily Democrat. [volume] (Akron, Ohio) 1892-1902, 1899-12-09
ROBERTS 4 FUGITIVE.
Charges on File In Two Coun
ties, Said Opponents.
TOOK WIVES, DEFYIMG TIE Law.
adultery a Crime In Utah When Roberts
Was Born-Cullom Anti-PoIyssmy Act
Passed, When He Was Six Years Old.
Charges Against Mormons.

CATION repreSenting the Gentle eie
ment in Utah. who are here to oppos
Mr. Roberts. The answer said in part
whenever "pr;ma facie'' case is mad,
against members citizenship by show
ing that under a conviction for felony
against the laws of the United States h,
Is dlsfranchlscd and furthor that b,
reason of his present maintenance of tn,
status OF a polygamist he is again suffer
ing from civil disability under the Ed
munds anti-polygamy act, such mem
Der refusing even to deny the charge
Should be excluded. Nor is this danger
Gus, for 1t is not likely, as Mr.. Roberts
seems TO assume, that an entire minority
or all representatives of large state arc
coming to congress carrying such bur
uen. In other states, men who fiaunt
tnelr violations of the laws of decency in
the lace of the public are sent to the peni-
tentlary.
MIR. Roberts contention that no eyi.
dence of his guilt can be received except
Judicial record Of his conviction in Utah
as matter of law is erroneous and, as a
matter OF practice, dangerous, because
Mr. Roberts and his oil powerful and in.
splred priesthood can prevent such convic-
tion II they consider it orth while.
II at the time of the passage of the en-
abilEg act Mr. Roberts was, as he seems
in his appeal to admit, disfranchised by
act OF congress, and therefore not full
citizen OF the United States, as by the con-
stitutlon he must be- to become member
OF congress, then he is still in that same
condition, because the constitution of
Utah could not restore him to federal cit-
zenship and the enabling act did not do it.
The enabling act of Utah, unlike that of
M hn1 cfafs, 1,t
the United States as a qualification for
voting and did not confer that citizenship
upon those then not such citizens.
Mr. Roberts says he has not been con-
vlcted since statehood. 1t does not follow
that he is innocent. He is now fugitive
from justice in Salt Lake county, on "a
charge of unlawful cohabitation and in
Davis county, Utah, where resides one Of
his polygamous wives with her illegiti-
mate twins, born Aug. II, 1897, charge
OF adultery "a felony under the laws of
Utah) has been for two months pigeon
holed by the Mormon prosecuting attor-
ney.
Mr.. Roberts, in his attempts to belittle
his crimes, insists that he is only charged
with misdemeanor. He knows better.
He knows that he has been, under oath
and before the proper prosecuting of
fcers, charged with the felony of adultery
as we'll as the misdemeanor of unlawful
cohabitation. He asserts that in 1889 he
pleaded guilty to amisdemeanor only, and
also says that if he were guilty of the same
acts in the District of Colu1nbia-''even
fagrantly so'-that as member of con-
gress he could not be arrested therefor,
because 1t is onlya misdemeanor. Here
again Mr.. Roberts states what is not true,
and he ought to know it. Unlawful CO.
habilation under the Edmunds act, under
which he pleaded guilty, was felony,
as also is adultery. with which Mr.. Rob-
erts Is charged in Davis county, Utah. In
the District af Columbia, both unlawful
eohabitation and adultery are felonies, as
defined by the Utah statutes, and it is only
in Utah that the former is a amisdemeanor
Many sentimental people are being mis-
led by Mr.. Roberts very ingenious sugges-
tiOn from which some people infer that he
took his polygamous wives when it was
lawful to do so. This is a mistake. Adul-
terry was a crime in Utah when Mr. Rob
erts was born, and at the time of the pas
sage Of the Cullom anti polygamy act, Mr.,
Boberts wss only i years old.
His plea for sympathy, therefore,
only to this, that he should be
allowed to continue his criminal prac-
tices Notwithstanding he took his polyga-
nous wives in defiance of law. We de-
mand that he should support his families,
but also demand that he shall cease the
DcSetIiuS VI lurIueI litGitlLudte OuSprlnV
and this Is our only bone of contention,
the only thing demanded which he re-
fuses to yield.
Ex-Congressman w. H. King was and
Is Mormon, and no claim of lneligibility
was ever made against him. We point to
this fact as showing that we oppose Mr..
Roberts not upon the ground of any reli-
yious opinions entertained by him, but
because of his criminal practices. Neither
Is this matter of religious or political
or prejudice. The under
signed include men of different churches
and men who belong to no church.
Mr.. Roberts denies and we assert that
The compact between Utah and the other
states has been violated.
That compact was evidenced by many
public acts.
Here are given different evidences Of
,he fact that the Mormon church and Nor
non people agreed to stop polygamous
practices.
The statement then said in part:
As evidence that this compact has been |
,roken we point to the following:
First-That in Utah LOCO illegitimate |
children have been born to polygamous |
wives since statehood.
Second-That about 1900 polygamous
households now exist in Utah and that |
he attempt to secure punishment of |
hese offenders is denounced by the major
ty, as we believe, of Utah's citizens.
Third-That the circumstantial evil
Lence Enthusiastically points to the exist
nee of new wives in polygamous house
lolds, the most conspicuous examples of
which are the cases of Apostles Abraham
l. Cannon, John w. Taylor and Apostle
in at least the first of which the
hurch organ of the dominant church re-
uses to deny the marriage and the new
Il vii ia
n a church academy.
Fourth-That the Ssry men who inter-
reted the manifesto of 1880 to prohibit
Unlawful cohabitation with prior acquired
1ives now publicly justify its continu-
nee.
Fifth-That most Of the same men who
q a petition for amnesty pledged their sa-
heir people are now by example and pre-
ept encouraged to commission of the
rime of unlawful cohabitation.
Sixth-As u further evidence of this bad
aith, we call attention to the fact that
zen holding high church office have plead
uilty to the crime of unlawful cohabita-
ion before the state courts without hay
ng their church standing affected, even
4 some eases having their fines paid by
friends.
Seventh-All this is by necessary impi-
alton indorsed by n majority OF Utah's
eople in the election of brigham FL. Rob-
rts, who during his campaign for cleo
on, was publicly charged with being a
iolator Of the laws, Us evidenced by his
legitimate progeny, and in spite of these
ndenied charges he was elected by an
majority.
That Mr.. Roberts himself understood
nat compact to mean the discontlnuance
unlawful cohabitation we point to his /
,gistration oath of 1905, in which no
wore 1t to be his intention to obey the
w prohibiting unlawful cohabitation.
The statement was signed by the fol-
wing. II C. Iliff Salt Lake: q, WI