Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1899-11-28
ROBERTS OF UTAH
His Conviction Of Polygamy and Dis
reimbursement,
THE AMNESTY PROCLAMAfIONS
Claim That He Should Have Acted
in Good Faith.
SENTIM ENT JAIN ST HIM


four months in prison. Under this convic-
ton he was disfranchised and prohibited
from holding office. Mr.. Roberts was prom
inent in politics in Utah, and disfranchise-
ment was a severe blow to him.
He therefore hastened to take advantage
of the amnesty offered by President Harr-
son some time afterward to those who had
offended against the law, that is, the Ed
monds act, prohibiting poiygamy and un-
lawful cohabitation.
Amuesty Proclamation.
President Harrison's amnesty proclama-
tion az follows:
Il do hereby declare and grant full am
nesty and pardon to all persons liable to
the penalties of said act by reason of un-
lawful cohabitation under the color of
polygamous plural marriage who since
November l, 1880, have abstained from such
unlawful cCha ahitatiOn, but upon the express
condition that they shall in future obey the
laws of the United States hereinbefore
named, but not otherwise" This was Jan
uary 1, 1893.
President Cleveland. September -, 1894,
also issued an amnesty proclamation to all
excepting per-ons who have not complied
with the conditions of said proclamation of
January T. 1898" The condition of absti-
neuCe from future cohabitation was plain
and unmistakable.
tation Of these proclamations meant that
if a person continued habitation with
plural wives his amnesty and his franchise
were forfeited.
His Repatriation Oath.
Mr.. Roberts clnched his renewal to the
rights of citizenship by taking before d
registration officer, August -, 1880. the re-
quired registration oath as follows:
II will support the Constitution of the
United States and will faithfully obey tie
laws thereof. and especially will obey the
act of Congress approved March -, 5Ss2
Che Edmunds acD, and l will not,
directly or indirectly aid or abet, couns i
or advise any ether person to commit any
OF said crimes"
been denied, that Mr. Roberts has lived in
the marriage state with his plural wives
since then August II, 1897, the reputed
second wife of Mr. Roberts bore twins. it
is alleged.
The legal contention which has been set
up in favor of Mr.. Roberts is accepted as
technically correct 1t is claimed that upon
the admission Of Utah to statehood the
Edmunds act did not apply. therefore that
his oath to obey it was void and that in
cOhabiting with wives married prior 10 the
admission of the state no law was broken.
There is a disposition among many rep
reSentatiVes in Congress to disregard this
technical plea of Mr. Roberts supporters.
They claim that in granting amnesty Pres
idents Harrison and Cleveland acted in
good faith, and that good faith may req
sonably be eXaCted from those who availed
themselves of the amnesty.
Mr.. Roberts Position
In interview with a Star reporter last
week Mr.. Roberts was asked:
do you hold that the fulfllment of mar
ital obligations incurred prior to the ad-
mission Of the state is not in violation Of
hk with Init
Most emphaucally do he replied be
cause the constitutional convention care
fully avoided the adoption of a measure
which would have made such fulfiiment
violation of the contract.
The amnesty prOclamatiOns Of Prcsi-
dents Harrison and Cleveland undoubtedly
covered my case, as | obeyed the oath. /
took the oath, the usual registration oath,
in August, 1875, and have strictly observed
Its conditions. That was after the consti-
tutiOnal convention had met and framed
the state constitution and it was then be
fore the people for adoption, in the fail of
1895.
''The United States law requiring that
oath expired by limitation on the adms
sion Of Utah to the Union five months
afterward, and since that time we have
been living under the constitution and laws
of the state Of Utah. The expiration by
limitation of the United States laws is the
part that has not yet been stated
Whatever correctness may attach to this
believed that Mr.. Roberts can escape the
sentiment against polygamy.
Mr. ClcyeInnd's Message.
President Cleveland, in his message to
Congress in 1885. said:
"They Uhe Utah commissioners further
report that while there cannot be found
upon the registration lists of voters the
name of a man actually guilty of polyga-
| my, and while none of that class are hold
| ing Office, yet at the last election in the
territory all the officers elected except in
one county were men who, though not
actually living in the practice of polygamy,
subscribe to the doctrine of polygamous
maria ges a divine revelation and law
unto all higher and more binding upon the
| conscience than any human law local or
| national
| Thus is the strange spectacle presented
| of a community protected by a republican
| form of government, to which they owe
| allegiance, sustaining by their suffrages "a
| principle and belief which sets at naught
| the obligation of absolute obedience TO the
| law of the land which lies at the founda-
| ton of republican institutions.
1.-The strength. the perpetuity and the
| destiny of the nation rest upon our homes
| established by the law of God, guarded by
| parental care, regulated by parental au-
thority and sanctified by parental love.
| These are not the homes of polygamy
| The mothers of our land, who rule the ma
| ton as they mold the characters and
| guide the actions of their sons, live accord
| ing to Gods holy ordinances, and each, Sc
| cure and happy in the exclusive love of the
! father of her children, sheds the warm
light of true womanhood, unperverted AID
| unpolluted, upon all within her pure and
| wholesome family circle. These are not
| the cheerless, crushed and unwomanly
mothers of polgamy.
| THE fathers of our families are the best
| citizens of the republic. Wife and children
| are the sources of patriotism, and conjuga
| and parental affection beget devotion tC
| the country. The man who undef1led witt
| plural marriage is surrounded in his single
| home with his wife and children has q
| stake in the country which inspires hin
| with respect for its laws and courage fol
| its defense.
| '''These are not the fathers of polygamous
| families There is no feature of this prac
! tice or the system which sanctions Il
| which is not opposed to all that Is of value
| n our institutions
| Principles at Stake.
| These are the kind of arguments which
| are being advanced by those who are mos
| determined to unseat Mr.. Roberts. They
| will insist. especially the women who hav,
| taken up the fight, that this House shall
stand on the broad principles at stake
| brush aside the technical defense put UP O.
| invalidation of Roberts responsibilities b,
! the admission of the state and the ahropa