The Richmond climax. (Richmond, Ky.) 1897-1914, 1899-01-25
Washington Pos.

Editor Post: / have watched with
much interest the discussions ard
speculatiOns through the papers as to
what Congress will and should do in
the case OF b. II. Roberts. Congress
man-elect from Utah. My interest is
intensified by the fact that | spent the
greater portion of the past two sum-
mers in Utah, on business, my business
taking me all over the State, il to the
most remote rural districts, and bring
ing me in contact with all Glasses OF
Utah's population. Often was many
miles from the railroad.
Naturally. while making these trips
l talked with the people in reference to
their old practice of polygamy, when
could do so with proprirty and without
interfering with my own affairs.
To my surprise, every one talked freely
and with evident frankness. My o.
portunities for Judging of the senti
ments of the people were very good.
For instance, stopped two weeks with
gentleman who had served three
terms in the Utah peniientiary because
he persistently refused to give up two
OF his three wives; spent a week at a
boarding house run by former wife Of
Mormon Bishop; stopped with the
Bishops themselves on several occa
sions, in different localities; travelled
seventy-five miles, through the coun-
try, with the son of a Mormon by a
plural wife; stayed for week and a
half with former Bishop, who, as the
Mormons expressed it, has "apostated"
(left the church,, and heard express
ions on the subject from innumerable
individuals of all classes, in the church
and out of 1t.
After this experience, / believe 1
understand the situation thoroughly;
even better than many non-Mormon
residents in Utah, because as a rule
their observations are confined to sin
gle locality, and then L was wholly
without prejudice, political or other
wise. The average Gentle" (as non
Mormons are called). who resides in
Utah is intensely anti Mormon-they
view the situation through a partisan's
glass. There are many causes for this
often it is brought about from the fact
that the Gentiles want the offices, to
which the MormOns almost invariably
elect their own friends and church
members.
have noticed that several newspa
psrs take the ground that the DISPOSE
ton among the people of Utah to re-
sumo the practice OF pOlygany is grow
ing. In justice to those people want
to say that such is not the case. The
MormOns cannot, according TO their
OWN creed, consistently encourage po-
lvgamy now. True from the date Of
their revelation % on the subject dow n
to the time polygamy was declared I'M
lawful they taught it as part of their
religion and put it into practice, but
after polygamy was made crime by
act Of Congress, and the constitutions
ality of that law tested in the highest
court in the land, the church issued a
manifesto torbidJing It's future prac-
tice. They were compelled TO do this
| by their own creed. One of their foun-
datiOn doctrines is that, first of all,
they must submit themselves to the
temporal power. Mr. Roberts occupied
a very prominent place in. the church,
and the other leaders certainly know it
If he is now, in the face of the law made
by the Mormons, and in the face of the
manifesto issued by the church, prdc-
ticiug polygamy, and if he is guilty, l
am surprised that he has not long since
been accommodated by the church.
This is, at least, prima facie evidence
of his innocence.
OF course, the old men in Utah who
were forced to give up their pl2ral
wives, whose children We're bastardzed,