The Wilmington daily Republican. (Wilmington, Del.) 1890-1902, 1899-12-06
ROBERTS Is KEPT OUT.
10 Must Await Congressional Ac-
ton On His Eligibility.
THE MoRMos1rE's ARGUMENT

tiou w LIS AiISApAA!sys
THE MORMoEITE's ARGUMENT
For . Sea, !. tn. In u.... :.
conTre.s-Deslares he q Bet
ter Right, Beins sent From = Sow
ereign state, Than Had Cannon.
Washington. Dec. 6.--~After an inter.
esting debate OF three hours the house
yesterday, by 6 vote OF 302 to 30.
adopted the resolution offered by Mr..
Tayler, OF Ohio. for the appointment
OF special committee to investigate
the charges against Brigham H. Rob-
erts, the Mormon representative-elect
from Utah. Previously the house had
rejected substitute resolution offered
by Mr.. Richardson. the leader OF the
minority, TO allow Mr.. Roberts to be
sworn In ana to send the whole case
to the Judiciary committee. This sub
stitute resolution, however. by no
means commanded the full Democratic
strength. Only 81 members voted for
It. OF the 30 vo then voted against
the Tayler resolution all were Demo-
| Gratis except two-Mr. Loud, q Cali
iornia Republican. and Mr.. Newlands,
q silverita from Nevada. BY the terms
of the resolution Mr.. Roberts il now
not only excluded from all participa-
ton in the proceedings of the house
until the committee reports and the
house passes upon his case, but he is
denied q seat In, the hall. Whether
this will be interpreted to deny him
admission within the chamber pending
the disposition of his case Is yet to
be decided. The reading Of the presi-
dents message was completely over
Swallowed by the dramatic proceedings.
The galleries were thrOnged with
spectators, mostly women. who sat
patiently through the three weary
hours that preceded the debate and
was concluded. The most remarkable
feature of the debate was the fact that
| Mr.. Roberts presentation Of his own
side. Of the case. which lasted almost
an hour. became 80 absorbing that he
won the sympathy Of many of those in
! the galleries and was showered with
applause. It was evident that he re-
allied that the house was overwhelm-
ingly against him. and at times he
spoke fiercely and deflantly.
Mr.. Roberts began by sending to the
clerks desk and having read copy
Of his naturalization papers, In order,
! as he said. that all the documents in
this extraordinary case should be be-
fore the house. He then read a para
graph from McCreary on elections, con-
tanning general caution against hasty
| procedure in election contests. He
then discussed the charge that he had
pleaded guilty Of misdemeanor 10
years ago, and called attention to the
| fact that since that time two presi-
Dental amnesties have been applied
to men disqualified by the Edmunds-
Tucker act. He proceeded:
"The gentleman from Ohio has no
court record to show that was ever
arraigned or condemned of crime
whatsoever since the PRONUNCIATION Of
amnesty proclamation Of the president
of the United States. The gentleman
seems also to forget the fact that since
the confession Of that misdemeanor to
which he has referred there was pass
ed by congress an enabling act author
izing the people of the state Of Utah
to form state government. That en-
abling act also had provision en-
bodied In 1t that qualified all citizens
within the limits of the territory to
become citizens OF the United States
and was particularly framed to re-
h o1t Ar IL
tiles which nave been created by the
Edmunds- Tucker law. The gentleman
seems to forget also that the state con-
stitution of Utah was satisfactory to
the president and his advisers and
Utah has been admitted as a state into
the Union and has taken upon itself
the responsibilities of a sovereign
state. declaring under Its constitution
people residing in its borders shall
exercise the elective franchise and be
qualified for Office as citizens OF that
great commonwealth.
1.-THE second charge, which is sup
posed to 60 to the question eligibility
of the member from Utah, is that upon
affidavit and other papers in his pos
session the gentleman from Ohio says
that ever since 1889 l have been a per-
sistent law breaker In the state of
Utah. II that be true, let me ask why
1t Is that was not punished for law
breaking. Certainly there was no dis
position to execute the law on the part
Of the people of Utah. Its admins
tration was in the hands of non-Mor-
mons, of those who had no sympathy
with men Of my religious faith. All
the machinery of the law was in the
hands of appointees. How Is 1t then
that | could be an open and defiant
law breaker and yet escape the penalty
of law?
81 call your attention next to the
fact that the only charge against me,
even by the proponents Of this resolu-
ton, Is that of misdemeanor. They
do not charge felony l understand
that the members Of congress are
granted certain privileges while in at
tendance upon this house. 1t would
be impossible to arrest any one of the
members upon the charge of a mis-
demeanor. And yet you would deny
me the privilege of baing sworn az q
member Of this couse. upon the allega-
ton of the existence Of some charge
or other that was guilty of mis-
demeanor. The little coterie Of men
who have entered into this conspiracy
to crowd this question to the front
are fearful that II the matter should go
to consideration under resolution
to sxpel the member from Utah they
could not marshal the necessary two
thirds vote.
Il invoke the protection that is
given to the constituency Of sover-
eign state against the proceedings that
are instituted here to deprive me of the
privilege of being sworn in as men,
her oil this house. Privilege did l say,
SIR am not asking any privilege In
this house. am not asking any favor
Of the members Of this house. Under
the shadow Of the constitution of the
United States. merely demand both
for myself and for the people of my
state, the protection that is due to U.S."
Mr.. Roberts next called attention to
the precedent In the Forty-third con-
gress In tn case of Mr.. Cannon, who
was admitted as delegate from Utah
territory, adding:
II can add nothing to the force OF
that gentleman's remarks, except this,
that in the case of Mr.. Cannon the