The Topeka state journal., 1899-12-06

who had no sympathy with men OF my
religious faith. All the machinery OF
the law was in the hands of federal ap-
pOintees. How is it, then, that 1 could
be an open and defiant law breaker and
yet escape the penalty of law
'The gentleman'S objection IS then
based, not upon court record, but upon
athdavits and papers that have been
supplied him by the people.
And now as to the manner in which
these charges are made. 1t has been
about fifteen months since they began,
since the representative from Utah was
heralded throughout this land as de-
fant law breaker And yet 1 walked
the streets of Salt Lake in open day,
within easy reach of the law, and my
faults lay open to the law, if 1 were
guilty of transgressing. Other men
were arrested before the courts of Utah
and were fined for the very Offense al
legged against me, and yet no complaint
was made against me No. it did not
suit the purpose of those who had this
present agitation in hand to vindicate
the law correctly and by the usual
methods. They desired particularly to
have this case upon which apparently
to arouse the sentiment of the country
Not until my business called me east
did they undertake to make any
charges against me But the moment
or shortly after my departure, they be-
gan this agitation, resulting in the
present sentiment of the country now
aroused against me. I call your atten-
tiOn next to the fact that the only
supporters of the resolution, is that of
a misdemeanor. They do not charge d
felony
I understand that the members of
congress are granted certain privileges
while in attendance upon this house
It would be impossible to arrest any
one of the members upon the charge of
a misdemeanOr. And yet you would
deny me the privilege of being sworn
as a member of this house, upon the
allegation of the existence of some
charge or other that I was guilty of a.
misdemeanOr. For the thing for which
the law itself could not lay a hand on
me While in attendance upon this house,
you propose speak of the little cot
erie of men who have entered into this
conspiracy to crowd this question to
the front at this particular time and
for the reason they are fearful that if
the matter should go to a consideration
under a resolution to eXpeI the mem
ber from Utah they could not marshal
the necessary twO-thirds vote to ac-
cOmplish their purpose to pass the pres
ent resolution.
I understand, sir, that these i'm
munities are not given for the benefit
of the individual members. They are
given rather as protection to his con-
Stituency, who are entitled to his SER
vices as their representative. And
therefore. I invoke the protection that
is given to the constituency of a SOW
ereign state against the proceedings,
that are instituted here to deprive me
of the privilege of being sworn in as a
member of this house. Privilege, did
say, sir. I am not asking any privileges
in this house. 1 am not asking any
favors of the members of this house.
Under the shadow of the constitution
of the United States I merely demand
both for myself and for the people Of
my state, the protection that is due US
and it is a demand, and it is asking no
favors." Great applause on the Dem
Ocratc side and in the galleries.)
Proceeding, he took up the charge
IA
the United States by the election of an
alleged polygamous representatives II
that We're true, then Utah had simply
followed the lIuStrlOuS example OF the
present national administration.
i affirm" said he, that there is abun-
daut evidence that objections similar to
those in the present case were made to
the president and the senate against the
appQintment of certain federal officers in
DO You mean TO say that polyganists
We're appointed to federal of1ce in Ctah
by the present eXecuuve?' queried Mr..
with the knowledge of the president"
added Mr.. GrOsvenOr (Rep. Ohio. quickly
amid some laughter on the Democratic
..When men were applicants for federal
~ 80, - d ~
GblecJOnS We're Inade ana aItldaNltS were
filed both With the president and senate.
but nevertheless the appointments were
That does not answer my question: OBJ
Mr. Roberts urged that the case ought
to go TO the Judiciary committee. where
1L COQIU
Republican side that this was serious
question. If the people of Utah were
union. what Of the president who had
appointed to life positions in Utah men
NIr- Roberts ridiculed the manner in
which the petition favoring his expulsion
MED that the members who voted to seat
him would be voting for polygamy. The
L hold it as an honor said he that
I will be quoted long in Utah as
question the floor Of the constitutional
convention 1 am not defending polyga-
Mr.. Roberts concluded by thanking Mr..
Tayler and the house for their indulgence.
He was given a round of applause as he
Mr.. Grosvenor CRep. o. denounced NIr.
Roberts statement concerning the ap-
pointment by the president of pOlYgamists
in Utah as a miserable subterfuge. Il
United States never Knowingly appointed
Il polygamist to office As well might a
charge that the president had plunged
his stainless hands in human blood as to
men guilty of the crime alleged against
the gentleman from Utah Great ap-
plause on the Republican side)
charged and I reiterate it" said Mr..
Roberts, that men appointed to office in
Utah We're charged before the president
and the senate with the same misdemean-
or qL Whlch II IS charged am guilty
Were they guilty?' &nquired Mr.. Dali
IT does not appear whether they We're
guilty" ans wered Mr.. Roberts, raising
his voice and looking around the hall !
They were only charged as 1 am charg-
ed" Applause on the Democratic side !
in which many people in the galleries |
JOined)
MT TayIer concluded the debate. Mr.
Roberts he said, had exhibited a large
incapacity. to understand his CTayler's) !
position, his (Roberts' position on the
spirit of the American peOple-a right
eOus expression of their sentiment justly
founded, however much misdfrected. He |
did not say Mr.. Roberts was guilty But
he. he indicted him upon his own response !
substitute. which was defeated. 59-247
The vote then REQUIRED on the adoption !
NJ. IA IL,