The Portland daily press., 1899-01-24
eDMUNDs ON PoLYGAMY.
ceess Must Seat Roberts, but May Ex-
pei Him.


article on polygsmy and the case of Con-
gresham elect Brigham Ii. Roberts. He
says:
"lt is row evident enough that Con-
gress was mistaken when it passed the
Enabling act in supposing that polyga-
nous notions had disappeared and that
the state would go on in the same way as
other states. Congress also must have
overlooked the fact that any engagements
on the part of the state OF Utah as u con-
ditian Of it's admission to the Union relat-
ing q the administration of Its internal
affairs would not no binding In point OF
law and could only bind the faith Of the
State Government, for breach of which
tbs only redress must be the forcible over
turning Of the state Government, which
ucuid be simply war. The in slant the
State was admit ed, every act of Congress
relating to its internal policy ceased 60
have any iCroe whatever. The conse-
quenee IS that in point Of law, the State
Of Utah has the same sovereign rights
that any other state has. She may pun
ish pei sgamy OF unlawful oohabitation.
OF she may authorize it. She may de-
clare, as Congress had done, that illegiti-
mate children shall not Inherit, or she
may declare, MS she appears to have done
since her admission. that Legitimate
children shall inherit on an equal foot
ing with leeitimates.
1.-THE Constitution of Utah only prohib-
its the ceremony of making polygamous
or plural marriage. Ii does not prohibit
tie carrying on of polyganous relations.
Nur do her laws 20 any further, so far as
l. can ascertain. In fact sho is, as l have
said, absolutely independent Of Congress
in respect of the subject, and she appears,
from all reports, to ba steadily taking ad
vantage Of her opportunities. and has, If
reports are true, deliberately elected 10
Congress person in the open and notori
| Gus practice of polygamy. l am not In
formed at what time thess alleged polyga-
NOUS marriages took place, nor is this
material to the question. If they took
lace before the state WAS admitted, Mr..
Roberts could have feen punished by the
authorities Of the United States. But he
cannot be now. The acts of Congress,
while they punish cohabitation with
plural wives, did not punish ard were not
intended to punish those who had been in
the practice OF Tolygamy tor supporting
those who had teen their unlawful wives;
tut they did provide for Furnishing CON
tinuanue of the polygamous relation. IL
MIR. Roberts's poiygamuus marriages TOOK
place after the State was adnitted, he
would lie guilty of violating the State law
IN contracting such marriages, but he
would not be guilty OF violating any
state law in living as husband with all
his plural wives. Ior 80 far as I am 10
formed there is no such law OF Utah. In
any casa, rs is true every where, statutes
rgstraj ming crime are OF no value unless
there lie a state of government, executive
tfs.tF. ali 81 IN.
execute tn law and uring offenders to
punishment. Ii would seem clear from
what has tlanspired that the Government
of Utah has no disposition to proceed In
that direction.
I'm this state of things, you ask: What
can the House of Representatives do IN
the case OF Mr.. Roberts? 1he Const!tu.
ton OF this United States provides that
the House OF Representatives sholI be the
Judge of the election and qualifications of
Its mem hers. Inc power TO judge OF the
election is merely the power TO ascertain
whether IA majority of the legal voters
have in JhemanEer proviced.by law voted
forihe member and that Is all. 1he..qusli-
iicatious of the member are there. He
must be twenty-five years Of age; hessmust
have been seven yenTS citizen Eof the
Unitea states; he must have besu at the
time of his election an inhabitant OF the
State. Or These three requisites the House
is tho JuuHc. II ne poSseshts knete, Tue
House has, In my opinion, no lawful
power to apply any other or further test
in respect OF hls being admitted TO "a seat.
1t would .be extremely d ngerous for
Constitution 10 give n majority of a
House the night to determine what par
ticular sort OF man the people Of State
should have the right 10 elect TO represent
them further than our Constitution to
give majority OF House the right TO
determine what particular sort OF man
the people Of Stats should have the right
to elect TO represent them further tAan
our Constitution mas declared.
This is too obvious to require illusrra-
zion. but when man selected and
possessing the qualifications required by
the Constitution has once taken bis seat,
the Constitution brings into play another
entirely different provision. authorizing
the Houss, with the concurrence Of two
tirds, 10 eGpel q member. Upon the exer.
else OF this right. the Constitution wisely
imposed no Limitation except that of re.
curing the concurrence of two thirds to
eXpel. If, therefore, the House OF Repre-
sentatiyes shall lind on due inquiry that
Mr.. Roberts is an open. practical and
persistent polygamisU. ami the House
thinks that in view OF that fact and in
connection with thu circumstances under
which Utah was admitted, or without
reference to these circumstances, 1t will
be reproaoh TO its dignity ana good
name to continue MIR. Roberts as IA men,
her, II may lawfully and rightfully expel
him. If 1t does not act at all (supposing
the facts to be AS stated), 1t will have
given its eoGuiescent approval Of the
conduct of MIR. Roberts and of the action
OF the people who elected him with full
henceforth 1t will be justly considered