Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1899-11-23
RATIONAL OPINIONS.

monclnF to take e more philosophical.
calm aud rational view u the agitation
over the Democratic choice of Congrcai-
man FOR Utah. Tho Springfield Republi-
can. or Nov. Is. thoughtfully argues
at IL very doubtful II the Influence q
Mr.. Roberts of Utah dcplorablc aa his
matrimonial status D.. upon the homes
u America. can b. rtCkuncd more b1n'-
fui than that Of people who jump rum
one cunnubiai connection to another. by
the decfccs Of court and clcrgymen.
with ua complete facility AZ man
can change ears. Mr. Roberts was
brought up to regard polyglmy rs
sanctioned by religion. II l. all wrong.
of courrc. and must be- condemned. The
Roberts system must be suppressed. NJ
the same time. Roberts Ia no more of
"a menace 60 society than the Million
aires ~ New York who Ect secret az
vorcoa from the courts ana then DEFY
the DEGREES annulllng their marriages ny
contracting now alliances within TWEEN
ty.four hours. IN some other state,
"Rapld.nfo divorce. no a matter OF
fact ~ far more dangerous TO the
American home than ilobetts with MS
three wives could over be- That u be-
cause rnpii-nr. dlvorc" has the veneer
81 legality and " not frowned upon by
society because " II lnalnuatlng AMI
atty. II II Co be- hoped that the force
~ the nnti.itobetts movement can Be
brought 90 the support Of divorce re-
form N that result " accomplished, the
intrepid charge on Roberts of Utah VIII
have more fif-r,aching results than Its
promoters have realized
The Boston Herald takes W the qucs-
ton Of the Utah Congressman at com
siderable length From IT, editorial on
tho subject We make the following oN-
ccrpts:
"The United states made II a stipuln-
tlun precedent a. the admission VI Utah
into tho Union that she should abolish
polyEnmy She ala 20. ana. " she per.
mlta polygumy after having accepted
her place NJ state. she H. violating her
pledge. Here occurred a dilemma, how
ever There we're several men Ia Utah
who had taken 10 themselves plu-
rniity Of wives under tho old law. and
the question arose what should be the
course pursued toward them. II was
u simple thing to repudiatc all these
wives but one. and we think that would
have been the action of thoroughly
heartlcsa and had man. But there were
thosc-und SIR. Roberts was one Of
them-who recognized obligations 10
these women lie had made a contract
with them. and he waa disposed 60
carry II QUITO continue In their sup
port, rather than 20 throw them uu.
supported upon the world. lie could
not dctnln them against their VIII. II
was easy for them To appeal to the law
fur their freedom from him " they
wished H. Hut they dll not wish IT,
They preferred To- remain, anu Mr.
Roberts recognlzed Il ~ . duiy to cone
tlnue 20 support thum,
"But We shall be asked. should poly
Enmy under any conditions have been
Nfmi.tcd In Utah after IT, admission
into the unlon3 Strictly speaking. Il
should not have been. The poplr OF
Utah. however seem a. have rrcog-
uiEcd thnt lta immediate removal would
create eases ~ hardship such AZ have
been inHtnucod above. and, therefore,
they decided not Ia prrHs the law into
immediate operation. n lH thus that
Mr. Roberts ana some others ate sim
lgft with plural wives. No now ln-
| stances NJ such marriage aru allowed.
nobody uppfuhDuds that unlyrnmy ~ 20
br continued; tho understanding h that
| the institution iH dying out, and that
| this practice la continued 90 prevent
hnrdahlrH 90 tho weaker parties In the
ease that might otherwise be- incurred.
"but ~ any event, suppose " be-
granted that the excuses FOR the action
NJ Alr Roberts that We have cited are
insufficient. and p1lyTamy Ia Utah In
Is dochdencr IL atili 10 odlous a. not
| TO be- tolerated the fact remains TINT
u ~ questionable " u f. IN the province
% the United States House OF Rcpr6.
HrntntlNoa Ia Interfere with II In thM
way, n IL the state law ~ Utah. not
the United states law. that fofblds
| p0yramy n polygamy IL TO be
stamped out In Utah, u must BE- done
by the State itself Congress. nH the
legislative body Of the nation, may an.
peal TO- the state 60 enforce IT, laws;
tho point may even De- raised that. In
not complying with tho Pledges under
which she entered the Union. the state
has rendered herself liable 10 become
the subject NJ legal Proceedings ngnlnst
her On Tho part of tho United States.
but this Is different AFFAIR from ono
branch ~ the National Congress rcfus.
lnr o. admit o. legally chosen member
into us association The proper appeal.
u strikes u.s. ~ To be made 10 Utah,
not 90 the national House OF Repre-.
Hpntntiyoa.
The qualifications necessary 10 on
title man Go become member of the
National House n Representatives. arc
nlmp'e They arc nrst, nn election 60
~, and the certificate NJ an election IL
conclusive evidence ON this point. IN tho
scat is not disputed Next the cnnstltu-
tlun declares that mo person STALL be- "a
rom sentative ~ hn shall not have at
lulurd the uHr of twenty-five years and
been seven years % citizen NJ the United
States. and who shall not. whom elect
ol, Dc an iuhabitunt of tho STATE Ia
which ho shah be- chosen This II All.
We dn not SEQ how Mt Roberts can
h' excluded from taking his scat while
he has compiled with those provisions
lln mny later be- expelled from Il by
tWu.thi.l s vote NJ lta momhcra. hut
under tho circumstances this oxtrcm.
nr Ton imrrpsHcs uH as 90 doubtful ius-
tlco ur vNpDdltrcy. n tho object h 10
nut an end 10 The feeble practice ~
p"NF1ny yet remaining In Utah. It
would better we think be- achieved By
more direct national action"
The town N Magazine Ark. Il said
lo have been destroyed by n tornado.