The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1899-11-29
EDMuNos ON ROBERTS CASE.

The great anti-Morrnon lawmaker has
preston that the ongre.sman-elect
from Utah VIII take his seat just as
The Herald has always contended that
he would.
The Philadelphia Times prints an in
terview with former United States
Senator Edmunds of Vermont, recog-
nized as the greatest constitutional
lawyer in this country. and author of
the EdHiunds anti-polygamy BILL" in
which he expresses a desire to see MIR.
Roberts expelled, but says that there
is no legal barrier to prevent the seat
ing of Brigham H. Roberts of Utah as
the properly accredited representative
OF that state in congress. He says Rob-
erts should be seated and his name en-
tered by the clerk on the rolls of the
house.
this were q personal matter with Mr..
Roberts he would be in favor of leaving
him alone, but he considers it fight
upon the Mormon church and the mem
bers thereof. wherefore he hopes to see
the congressman-elect expelled by a
two-thirds vote, and will use his influ-
ence to that end.
Going into details, the statesman
from Vermont explains his position
thus: Mr. Roberts fills the legal re-
quirements of the constitution and is,
therefore, eligible to premiership in the
house. The constitution says: No per-
son shall be a representative who shall
not have attained to the age of p years
and been seven years a citizen of the
United States. and who shall not, when
elected, be an inhahitant of that state
in which he shall be chosen And 1
find" says Mr.. Edmunds that the
Utah congressman-elec fills all Of these
requirements and is, therefore, eligible
to membership. 1 think mis- name should
be entered on the rolls as member of
the house. In my judgment there is
nothing else to be done. Despite the
fact that polygamy is practiced there,
Utah is a state, and If her people desire
to send man holding their view on
the question of marriage they have
right to do So
If the crusade against Mr.. Roberts
were personal matter, or if it were
actuated by the alleged immortality of
the man, Mr.. Edmunds says that few
members of his party would have any
hand in it; but, las it is generally I'M
derstood to be a war upon Mormonism
and polygamous teachings, will expect
to find my party consistent and relent-
less in its war upon the twin relics of
barbarisrn.''
Even as IL wars upon them in Sulu.
no doubt, while slaughtering the only
Christians among those 10000. 900 peo-
pie.
But Mr.. Edmunds is a trifle incon-
sistent. He says: Despite all that the
seating of Roberts would mean to Utah,
and despite my own feeling Of abhor-
renee for the teachings of the Mormon
religion, still believe that there is no
other course than to seat him.
Then ne adds: Having been seated,
however, Roberts should be immediate
ly expelled by two-thirds vote. as is
provided for by the constitution in the
case of objectionable persons who may
be elected. To refuse to seat him. he
says. would be TO aim a blow at the
rights of free people
If he were expelled the people would
be deprived of their representation in
congress in this way as effectually as |
they could be deprived OF it In the !
other way. The elbow at the rights OF |
free people" would not consist in the |
means employed. but in the end at
tanned. The ex-senator concludes as
follows:
IF he were refused admission because
he is a Mormon, someone else might I
be refused admission because his views
on the tariff did not agree with those
OF the majority OF the house. Our re-
publican form of government would
thus fall"
Could he not have said, with equal
logic. IL Roberts were expelled be-
cause he is a Mormon. and the inter-
view shows that that is what the ex-
senator holds against him, someone else
might be expelled because ne has red
nair. or because he is an atheist. or be-
cause he gets drunk. or because he
keeps a mistresso