The Washington weekly post. (Washington, D.C.) 1878-1916, 1899-02-21
Taking the Oath of Office.

The Galveston News makes this contri-
button TO the great and still expanding
volume of The literature Of the Roberts
case:
AS the News understands 1t. and as the
News believes most of the persons who
have written or spoken on the subject
understand it. Roberts does not hesitate
to say that he is openly supporting the
practice which for years kept Utah out OF
the Union and which is Still the menace
of her future standing. If Mr.. Roberts
position il not misrepreSenJed- il becomes
interesting 10 the country TO know how
he feels about taking the oath of Office
when he presents himself at the bar or
TIE House"
The oath OF office which Congressman
is required to take is provided for in the
third clause OF the sixth article of the
Constitution OF the United States, thus:
1.-The Senators and Representatives be-
fore mentioned shall be bound by
cath or affirmation to support this Consti-
| tuition" Inasmuch as that Constitution
does not In any manner directly or indi-
rectly, touch the charge preferred against
the Utah Congressman-elect. il is mighty
improbable that he is giving himself much
mental distress about taking the oath. If
it be true, as it doubtless is. that he sis
openly supporting the practice which 70.
years kept Utah out of the Union,'' ii does
not by any means follow that he is violat-
ing any law OF Congress or OF the State OF
Utah. The Edmunds act ceased TO have
any application 10 Utah as soon as she
came into the Union. The Constitution of
the State prohibits the contamination OF
''polygamous or plural marriages" but
all Of the marriages OF Roberts were con-
summated prior TO the adoption of that
instrument He is. therefore. as free TO
take the oath of office as any Representa-
tive-elect who will join him in that cerc-
mony.
When this celebrated case was first
launched upon the troubled waters of re-
| lisious. moral. political, and legal agita-
ton, The Post advised all the numberless
organizations and individuals who pro-
tested against the admission OF Roberts
| that he must be admitted; that he could
not be unseated by a majority vote on
| the ground Of fraud or irregularity; that
| the only way TO get MIN out was ex-
| pulsion. requiring two-thirds vote. Some
OF our contemporaries took issue with
that frank statement Of the situation.
| But every word OF il stands confirmed
| by the opinions OF the ablest jurists, and
/ some Of them 40 SO far as 10 assert that
| the expulsion Of the Utah Representative
would De nagrant violation OF the Con-
stitution. There are many lawyers OF
| high standing who do rot hesitate 10 say
| that any State might change It's constitu-
| tion 50 a. 10 lrgalize polygsmy. ana stlI
retain its right 10 representation IN Con-
gress and all other rights pertaining 10
i member Of the family OF States The
| Post has no apprehension OF such action
| In Utah or in any other State. IL has
| firm faith in the capacity OF monogamy
rot only to hold its own, but to speedily
| extlnguish the surviving remnants OF
| pOlyEamy. Our civilization is not a fail
ere. II moves forward. not backward
This is proven b. the great uprising OF