The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1899-12-20
ROBERTS AND HIS WIVES
A Number of Witnesses Exam
ined Before the Committee.
MANY OBJECTIONS MADE
The Representatives, Elect Conducts the
Cross in Persou-Peo-
pie Who We're Introduced to
the Several Mrs, Roberts.

Washington, Dec. IA number OF
witnesses from Utah appeared to-day
before the committee of the house 0t
representatives which is investigating
the case Of Mr.. Roberts of Utah. They
| included Miss DR. Luella p. Miles, a
practicing physician of Salt Lake City;
Mrs McDougall, e. A. Mcdaniel and
S. L. Wishard, all of Salt Lake.
Mr.. Roberts was present and con-
| Quoted the cross-examination.
| Miss Miles was the first witness. She
| gave her profession as that Of a physi-
clan at SAT- Lake and said she is a
member of the medical society there
she gave the details Of call she made
! at the house of Mrs. Dr. Maggie Shpp
Roberts on April Il, 1897, relating to
| some medical society affairs. She ad-
| dressed Mrs. Shipp Roberts as Or
| Shipp," Whereupon, the witness said,
| she was interrupted with the request,
Doctor, you can call me DR.. Roberts -
| Mrs. Roberts went on to explain. the
witness said, that she had been mar
ried to Mr.. Roberts for several years.
She asked that the medical society mail
| sent her in future be addressed to her
as DR.. Roberts, not as DIR. Shipp.'
Subsequently the witness called at
the house and after a visit Mr.. Roberts
| SstHiS III anu was lHtTUIlucSG. SollG
could not recall whether there was a
! specific introduction as husband or
| whether his entry was with such ia
miliarity as to indicate q marital
status. When Mr. Roberts cross exam
| ined the witness she repeated the same
| story.
MIR. Roberts Objects.
After the witness had stepped aside
| Mr.. Roberts submitted an objection to
| In of Gpt III 4
to 1897, whereas the committee had no
| jurisdiction over him prior to his be-
coming a member of congress.
Then you contend,' said Chairman
| TayloF, that the testimony should be
confined to polySamous practices sub
| sequent to March 4, 1892
| Il do answered Mr.. Roberts
"The objection will be noted" re-
| sponded the chairman.
Rev. S. E. Wishard was the next
witness. He gave his business as that
| of superintendent of the home mission
ary work of the Presbyterian synod,
| embracing Utah. He knew Mr.. and
Mrs. DR.. Roberts, and related his first
meeting with the latter in September,
| 1897. This occurred, he said, on the
train at Manti Utah. He was in car
with Roberts and spoke with him. A
| lady sat beside him, and he beckoned
| to her and then introduced her, say
! ing, Mrs. Roberts, Mr.. Wishard."
On cross examination Mr.. Roberts
brought out Mr.. Wishards opposition
to Mormon!sm, and then said:
Was Roberts drunk when he made
| this introduction referred to?''
Not that l know off,
WAS he insane?"
Il do not know"
What possible reason, then" asked
MIR. Roberts, could Roberts have had
for putting himself in such a position
wit h In Il hi,,,o
The witness said he could not explain
reasons; he repeated that the facts
We're as stated.
Introduced Her as His Wife.
Mrs. Maria McDougall testified that
on July %, 1898, when she was on a
train, Mr.. Roberts and Mrs. DR.. Rob-
erts Travelled on the same train. "Once
! heard Mr. Roberts introduce his COM
panon as my wife," testified Mrs
McDougall, and repeatedly as Mrs.
Roberts.
Edward Mcdaniel, former manager
of the Salt Lake Herald, was examined
at considerable length, mainly on the
politics and convention affairs pertain-
ing to Roberts nomination for con-
gress. In 1896, while managing the
Herald, he had a conversation with
Roberts, in the course of which Rob-
erts told him he had three families.
Subsequently, in 1898, the witness said,
| there was dUOlller CoINeESdllOn pTlOT
to the nominating convention relative
to rumors against Roberts. The latter
said he thought this line Of opposition
would not prove effective, as he would
court an attack as to plurality of
wives.
On cross-exa mination, Mr. Mcdaniel
said he had opposed the nomination of
Roberts.
Mr.. Roberts asked the witness: Did
not Roberts state at these conversa-
tions that Celia Dibble Roberts lived
out of the state?"
Il do not recall it." What Roberts
did say, the witness continued was
that he was not guilty of the crime of
polygamy. as that crime had been de-
fined by the supreme court as the TAX
ing of plural wives, thus making
distinction from unlawful cohabita-
ton
Mr.. Mcdaniel said his retirement
from the Herald was because he did
not wish to defend Roberts while living
in the polygamous relations.
Mr. Schroeder, the Gentle represen-
tative who conducted the direct exami-
nation, submitted a copy of an editorial
by Roberts in the New Era relating to
polygamy and its Biblical status.
Mr.. Roberts presented formal OBJ
lection to the testimony on the general
lines already stated. The committee
then took recess.
The Afternoon Session.
At the afternoon session T. J. Bran
don, a resident of Centerville, Utah,
where he had been postmaster and pro-
bate judge. testified that he had known
B. H. Roberts for years, also Louisa
Smith Roberts and Celia Dibble Rob
erts. He knew the children of Louisa
Smith Roberts, five or six in number.
Celia Dibble Roberts also had six chill
dren, if he remembered correctly. He
knew that on the morning of Aug. IL,
1897, it was currently reported about
Centerville that B. H. Roberts had a
pair of twins born to him by Celia
Dibble Roberts. He had seen them fire.
Quently since then. He also gave cir
cumstantial details of other children Of
Celia Dibble Roberts who, he said, were
recognized in the town as the children
OF b. H. Roberts and called for the
mail of Gala RnhaLtS nd anGa sicra IL;