The San Francisco call., 1899-12-09
ROBERTS ANSWERED
BY UTAH GENTILES
Congressman Elect Declared to
Have EVdded the Truth in
His Appeal to the Public.

WASHINGTON, Dec. S.-Brlgham Rob-
erts' address 10 the American people was
answered to-day by a delegation repre-
senting the Gentle element in Utah, which
is here 20 oppose Roberts. The answer Is
as follows:
In this mornings papers Mr.. Roberts makes
appeal for sympathy in which are many
statements needing correction. while many
facts are suppressed.
Mr. Roberts claims that the precedent made
by his exclusion Is both new and dang erols.
That II IS not new was eonclusively shown by
Mr. Taylor in his able legal argument before
the House. and not a single precedent TO the
e atrary was cited where the ground o; OBJ
jecticn was nellgibliity. Neither is the prece-
dent dangerous. Whenever = "prima Iacie'
cnse Is made a-a.nst q members citizenship,
showing that under a conviction for feluny
against the laws of the United states he Is
dlsiranch.sed. and further. that by reason OF
his present maintenance Of The status OF a
pulygs mist he Is again suffering from civil
disability under the Edmunds ant-polygamy
act. such member, refusing even 10 agny h.s
the charge. should be excluded. Nor is this
dangerous for II Is not likely as Mr.; Rob
erts seems 10 assume. that an entire minority
OF all Representatives OK a large state are
coming 10 Congress carrying such 4 burden.
In other States men who naunt their VIOLATIONS
OF these laws OF decency in the ace OF the
public are gent 20 the penitentiary. IL ~ only
in Utah where such indecency ever adtd 10
ones eligibility and served as recommends
ton 10 political preferment
Air. Roberts contention that no evidence OF
his guilt can be received except. JGdicial
record OF his conNictlon IN Aiai'' ds d AiaNNVA
OF law Is erroneous and. as matter OF PTs9-
tice. dangerous. because Mr.. Hoperts anu MS
all-pcweriul and Inspired prestho0u San pre-
vent such conviction II they consider II worth
while.
DIR Roberts claims that whatever were his
civil disabilities before statehood. they were
removed by the adoption OF the state constltu-
tion. II at the time of the passage OF the
enabling act Mr Roberts was. he seems in
his appeal TO admit disfranchised by act OF
Congress and. therefore. not a tuL ehiSsn
o. the United States. as by the &C. so9sttntaoh dnoa
tier ne IS still in the same condition. because
the constitution OF Utah could not restore him
aid not 40 IL The enabling act Of Utah un-
like that OF some other States, required cur
zenship OF the United states as
for voting and did not confer that Gitlzenshlp
upon those then not such citizens. hence Mr,
Roberts statement that by Cteh peSolrins .i q
State he was rehabllitated WIN the wa"uhs
attributes Of citizenship is unwarranted,
Mr.. Roberts says he has not been convleted
since statehood II does not follow that he Is
Innocent, He is now a fugitive from justice in
Salt Lake County charge OF gnlawiul CO.
habltation. and in Davis County utah %hene ERE
illecitimate twins. born on August IL, 1881; a
charge Of adultery ia felony under the laws of
Ctah) has been for two months pigeoh-hoieo py
a Mormon Prosecuting Attorney. ,..,
Mr. Roberts. in his attempt 10 helittle his
s mIs5emeanor. ] He He knows better He knows
that he has been. under oath and before the
felony OF adultery as well as the misdemeanor
Of unlawful cohabitation. He asserts that In
1859 he pleaded guilty 10 misdefneanor only,
and also says that II he were guilty OF the
same acts in the District Of Columbia, even
fagrantiy so" as member OF Congress he
could not be arrested therefor. for II is only
rnisdemeanor. Here again Mr.. Roberts states
what is not true. and he ought 10 know II. IN
lawful cohabitation under the Edmunds act.
under which he pleaded guilty, was a felony.
al also is adultery. with which Mr.. Roberts is
charged in Davis County, Utah In the Dis
trict OF Columbia both unlawful cohabitation
and adultery are felonies. as defined by the
Utah statutes. and it is only in Utah that the
former is a misdemeanor.
These charges in view Of the Edmunds and
EGmunds-Tucker laws Of the United States,
stiu in force warrant Mr.. Roberts exclusion.
They are aggravated, however, because his Is
not an Isolated case but one representative or
A system.
Many sentimental people are being misled
by Mr.. Roberts very ingenious suggestions
from which some people infer that he took his
so This is a mistake. Adultery a crime
in Utah when Mr. Roberts was born. and at
the time Of the passage Of the Cullom anti
polygamy act Mr. Roberts was only six years
old His plea for sympathy therefore amounts
only TO this: That he should be allowed 10
ing he took his polyEamous wives IN defiance
OF law. We demand that he should support
hts families. but also demand that he shall
cease the beEetting OF further illegitimate Off
the only thing demanded which he refuses 70
Yield. In this matter we disclaim any desire
TO have him declared ineligible because he is
n Mormon. but solely because he Is violating
and defying the laws OF our State. OF the
United States and OF common decency.
Mormon. and no claim OF inelig!bilty was ever
made against him. We point to this fact
showing that we oppose Mr.. Roberts not upon
the ground Of any religious opinions entertained