Wheeling Sunday register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1882-1934, 1899-12-10

erts, either before or since 1890 con-
tracted plural marriages, but as to the
inquiry of the committee on this sub
ject he specifically denies that since
October, 1890, he has contracted any
plural marriages.
Fourth, to the charge that ever
since 1889. when Roberts pleaded
guilty
To Unlawful Capitalization
in the then territory OF Utah, that he
has lived in polygamous relations, in
violation OF law, he pleads not guilty
Demur-Roberts demurs to the pro-
eeedings instituted before the commit
tee on the ground, because, first. the
committee has no jurisdiction over him
to try him for the alleged defense or
the offense charged.
Second, Roberts further demurs to
the evidence and papers upon which
the charge of continued polygamous liy-
ing is based, upon the ground that said
papers and evidence do not state facts
sufficient to constitute charge against
him that is in any way regular or ten
able or sufficient to deprive him of his
prima facie right to take the oath OF
office and occupy the seat in the House
of Representatives to which he has been
duly elected, and which election and
right is not contested.
Third, that said papers and evil
dence are ambiguous, unintelligible and
incompetent, and of such character
as to make the same not worthy to be
considered by the committee, and he
asks that his prima facie right to his
seat be now considered"
The first CT the public hearings be-
gan at 2 o'clock. At that hour the COM
mittee room was crowded with mem
bers, representatives of the press and
a delegation representing the Gentle
element of Utah. Roberts sat at the
foot CT the long committee table with
documents piled up before him. His
secretary was near at hand, bringing
him books and other data Of reference.
Chairman Taylor announced that
persons who had participated in franz
ing the charges were present and he
asked that they be heard.
Mr.. A. T Schroeder, one of the Gen
tile delegation from Utah, then stepped
forward and was about to proceed when
Mr.. Roberts rose hastily and raised mis-
hand in waving protest:
Il object" he said. 81 object to this
witness il he comes here as an attorney.
| object to him If he comes as a wit
ness on the ground that he is unworthy
of confidence. and because he is a
common swindler. And | propose to
establish by the records Of the Supreme
Court of Utah
That He is Utterly Unworthy
Of belief"
Roberts said he would present the
Tenth Utah Supreme Court Report in
support of his allegation.
MI. Taylor answered that Mr. Schroe-
der was not present as witness or as
counsel, but merely to give the COM
mittee such information as he could
and the committee would treat the mat
ter as it saw fit.
Mr.. Schroeder remarked that he did
not understand that he was on trial.
Mr. Roberts did not press his obiec-
ton further and Mr.. Schroeder pro-
ceeded.
Mr. Schroeder said it could be estab-
lished that Mr.. Roberts had main
tanned and is now maintaining the
status of a polygamist; that in 1889 he
pleaded guilty of unlawful cohabita-
tion and has since that time continued
in that relation. Specifically, Mr..
Schroeder said it could be established
that there had recently been born chill
dren to his polygamouS wives, among
them being twins born to Cecilia Dbl
blee Roberts, the reputed second wife
of the Congressman-elect. These chill
dren were reputed to be born, he said,
August II, 1897, and until this morn
ing he had understood were acknowl
edged by Roberts as his. 1t could also
be shown that he has been holding
out DR.. Maggie Ship Roberts as wife
and is now maintaining the status of
husband toward her; that during all of
these times he had living lawful
wife, Louisa Smith Roberts, who also
has borne him children.
Mr.. Schroeder said the witnesses
were in Utah, readily accessible If the
committee desired to summon them.
He suggested that
Miss Adah Roberts, the Daughter
of Mr.. Roberts, was now in the city
and might be available as a witness.
Rev. DR.. Stiff, of Utah. was asked
if he desired to add anything, but
stated that Mr.. Schroeder had covered
the general question sufficiently, and
that the detailed evidence would be
ready if the committee desired.
At this point Representative Nc
Pherson, of Iowa, member of the COM
mite, stated that he thought there was
a misunderstanding among members as
to the status of Mr.. Roberts. Some
thought he had made his statement in
order to frame an issue. Others thought
he had appeared as a witness and
should be subject to cross-examination
He said he feared the com rNittea xas