The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1899-11-26

It is undoubtedly a fact that
the matters of whether Brigham
H. Roberts, representative from Utah,
shall be ptrmitted to retain his seat
in the house, is the most agitated and
interesting question of the day here.
In the first place, it is a mere question
Of fact, whether Mr.. Roberts will remain
in the house II ne is guilty of violating
: the Edmunds law, which describes GER
tain things as unlawful in connection with
the advent of Utah into the union of
states, then he may be expelled; other
wise, not.
Mr. Roberts is Mormon. He does not
deny that. He has a plurality of wives.
He does not deny that. He has children
as a result of his plural marriages. He
does not deny that But he does deny
that he has married one or more of his
wives since the Edmunds law came into
effect and force. If he can prove this de-
NAL. he will probably keep his seat.
Mr.. Roberts will take his seat just the
same as Mr.. Long of the Seventh Kan
sas district. or other representative who
holds a certificate of election from the
secretary OF state of his state. Judicious
people. and those well informed, all con-
cede this and the agitation has switched
from a demand that he be kept from
taking his seat to one that he be ex-
PEELED This latter rs the course of Miss
Helen Gould, who is leading the anti
Roberts movement
He was not a law-breaker originally.
lie might have had thousand wives
but he was not maIefactor so long as
there was no statute to condemn him.
Neither could he De successfully arraign-
ed even after the PRONUNCIATION Of the
Edmunds law for any act committed pre-
viously There was nothing in that law
requiring him 10 abandon his wives and
children. and he would have been less
than human had he committed such an
infamy. The whole thing hinges on the
facts II Roberts has not violated the
iaw-and he can have done so only since
It's observation-disclosures IS no case against
hip If he has violated the law, of course
h. is a felcn and, therefore, cannot be
seated in congress.
The question clearly is on Of fact-not
sentiment il should not be considered
that somebody in New England objects to
;, Roberts. or somone from Texas or Ar
Nausaw Il is simply a question plain
ana simple-Did Roberts violate the Ed
munds law II he did. he is felon and
should not be permitted 10 take his seat
r. he did not and can prove it. he mas a
risht TO his seat. This is rapidly becom-
is the consensus Of opinion on the sub
jcct by serious people: not those who are
on the qui vivs for some chance TO make
q loud noise with their vocal organs. but
those who look into a thing before they
talk about what they VIII do.
Most Of the Kansas delegation favors
expulsion. Most are 50 declared. Con-
gresham Long as usual. is looking into
the matter. and says when it comes up,
ne viii be prepared 70 meet 1t sGuarcly
end fairly. and do As he deems best
ana riEht and just in the matter
Another thing is this; Roberts Is a
Democrat II Will take a two-thirds vote
u eNpsl He may not set this At any
rate. the question VIII probably be set
ted the Gay congress meeLs-s
ConSresSman Chester T. Long OF the
Seventh district of Kansas has no spe-
Cial 5.ii applicable To his district or Kan
sas in which he is interested. but in a
general way he Is Intensely interested in
the question OF trade with the Orient and
those growing out ot the late war. lie
believes implicitly in an Nicaraguau ca
nal the Pacific cable and the upbGilding
Of the merchant marine
All Of these. he thinks. VIII be opposed
by a number Of the members of con-
G-ess. bur he thinks they win ultimately
be successful. The Nicaragu1n canal win
have 70 be built. perhaps. under govern
Taent control; rhat is the government 10
guarantee the bonds. L viii take one
hundred and nifty millions 10 build the
big ditch. and no private enterprise WIN
probably take The risk Of doing e. But
she government can father the scheme