Shoshone journal. [volume] (Shoshone, Idaho) 1884-1931, 1899-12-11

the resolution offered by Mr.. Tayler
of Ohio for the appointment of spe-
cial committee to investigate the
charges against Brigham H. Roberts,
the Mormon representative-elect from
Utah
Previously the house had rejected a
su bstitute resolution offered by Mr.
Richardson, the leader of the minority,
to allow Mr.. Roberts to be sworn in
and to send the whole case to the jul
dietary committee by vote of SO to
247
OF the thirty who voted against the
Tayler resolution. all were Democrats
except two, Mr.. Loud, California
Republican, and Mr.. Newlands, Sill
verite from Nevada.
BY the terms of the resolution, Mr..
Roberts is not only excluded from all
participation in the proceedings of
the house until the committee reports
he house passes upon his case,
ne is denied a seat in the hall.
;, hether this will be interpreted to
deny him admission within the cham
her pending the disposition of his
case is yet to be decided.
The most remark able feature of the
debate was the fact that Mr.. Roberts's
resentation of his own side of the
case. which lasted almost an hour, be-
came so absorbing that he won the
sympathy of many of those in the gal
leries, and was several times showered
with applause. 1t was evident that
he realized that the house was over
whelmingly against him, and at times
he spoke fiercely and deiantly.
After the reading of the presidents
message had been concluded, as agreed
upon, Mr.. Tayler laid before the house
his resolution to refer the Roberts
case to special committee. Mr.. Rich
ardson. Democratic leader, introduced
the resolution above referred to, to
administer the oath to Mr.. Roberts,
but it was lost PAT to SO.
Mr.. Taylor then opened his speech
In favor of the adoption of his resolu-
ton. When Mr.. Taylor began to
speak, Mr.. Roberts left the seat he
had been occupying and took a seat
near the main aisle where he could
hear with greater ease. Throughout
Mr. Taylor's remarks he u. facing his
accuser, except when he turned to his
desk to take notes of the points to
which he desired to reply.
Mr. Taylsr read decision of the
supreme court defining polygamy,
which stated irrespective of whether
man had ontracted plural marriage
lfter the passage of the Edmunds act,
and irrespective of whether he had
nince cohabited with plural wife be
was guilty of polygamy if he still
maintained the relation of husband to
more than one wife.
Referring to the two proclamations
of amnesty he argued that the claim
ant was in no better position than he
would have been had no proclamation
been issued But higher than the
civil law was a law of civilization
which demanded that one SO tanned
should be excluded For supporting
the higher law a member was answer
able only to his conscience, his coun-
try and his constituents. There were
presidents for such an appeal to the
higher law.
He cited the case of Whittemore,
who had been guilty of selling cadet
ships and who, upon his appearance at
the bar of the house, was rejected as
unfit to sit in the house. The power
and the right were inherent, said Mr..
Tayler, il was only question OF pro-
priety, of wisdom and of precedent.
Mr.. Richardson, the Democratic
leader, who followed Mr.. Tayler, de-
clared that the minority was in no
wise bound by his position. He spoke
for himself alone. He was willing to
say that il the charges against the
were proven he should
favor his expulsion. ''If there is one
thing on which the American people
are unit" he said, sit is that the
home shall be preserved in
all it's loneliness, sweetness and purity
lApplause) But" he proceeded lit
is not wise to permit our judgment to
be warped by public clamor 10 do
SO amounts to condemnation without
trial"