The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1899-11-19
DEMOCRATIC LEADERS
DISCUSS ROBERTS CASE
Vigorous Discussion at Conference Held in This
City Yesterday.
Roberts Charged With Bad Faith, and Opinion Expressed
That 1t Was Not Partys Duty to Defend Him.

A number of prominent leaders OF
the Democratic party in Salt Lake and
Utah held conference in the law Of
fees of Rawlins, Thurman, Hurd &
Wedgwood yesterday afternoon and
spent four hours in discussing the po-
litical situation. The Roberts case
came in for a large share in the time
occupied by the conference, although
the invitations that had been sent out
merely stated that the object OF the
gathering was to arrange for the re-
organization OF the party for coming
elections
Chairman James H. Moyle of the
state Democratic committee presided
over the meeting and made some open
ing remarks in which he called atten-
ton to the purposes for which IL had
been called. After speaking of the late
election and expressing the belief that
Salt Lake City would be carried by
the entire Democratic ticket next time.
Mr.. Moyle brought up the Roberts
matter. He spoke of the petitions that
had been and that are now being CIR
culated. asking congress to expel the
member from Utah. and said that some
thing should be done to offset them
Mr.. Moyle proposed counter petitions
as a remedy.
w. H. Dale'S Opinion.
w H Dale thought that Mr.. Rob-
erts ought to be able to take care of
himself. He said that the Democratic
party had nominated and elected Mr..
Roberts and it's duty to him ended at
that point: The question of his hold
ing the office or being expelled from ii
was a purely personal one with the
congressman. Mr.. Dale stated that he
didn't blame Chairman Nozzle. as M.
Roberts attorney, for wanting the
party to take some action in his de-
fense.
The speaker declared that he had
worked against the noDsSi;1ation of Mr..
Roberts but that he we'd for him at
the polls, under the anticipation that
he would be able to clear up all the
charges made against him by the op-
position This Mr.. Roberts himself
had promised to do.
Chairman Moyle, when Mr.. Dale had
finished. denied that he was being paid
for acting as attorney for Mr.. Rob
erts. He said that he was merely
acting for him through personal friend
ship, and that he had received no fee
and expected none.
CONTINUING. Mr. Dale said that in his
Judgment counter petitions would do
no earthly good. He believed the
Democratic party. as a party, could
not afford to go on record as defender
of polygamy or any polygamist.
Senator Rawlins Talks.
E. w. Wilson made a talk along the
same line as that taken by Mr.. Dale,
and then Senator Rawlins was heard
from. Senator Rawlins expressed the
opinion that it would be idle TO get up
counter petitions. He thought such pa
pers would have little or no effect on
congress. Hundreds of petitions are
pigeon-holed by congress, he said. and
never acted on. Petitions that have
been prepared against Roberts would
be of no avail.
Senator Rawlins believed Roberts
would be seated and retain his seat
throughout his entire term, because he
was elected by the people and was the
choice of his people. He didn't think
congress would attempt to go behind
Congressman Roberts certificate of
election. However, it might be possi-
BILE that the matter would be referred
TO a committee and that Roberts would
have chance to defend himself before
that committee as we'll as in the open
house.
1t would take a two-thirds vote, in
Senator Rawlins' judgment, TO eXpel
the congressman, and he was satisfied
that many Republicans, as well as
Democrats, would vote against unseat-
ing him He added that Roberts had
been advised not to attempt to make
a defense of himself before the people,
but to prepare his defense and make
ii before the house, as that is the only
tribunal that has any authority what
ever in the case.
Letcher Was Outspoken.
Jerrold r. Letcher was quite out