The San Francisco call., 1899-12-06


and irrespective OF whether he had since
cohabited with a plural wife. he was
guilty OF polygamy II he still maintained
the relation OF husband 10 more than one
wife. Referring again 10 the two procla-
nations OF amnesty, he argued that the
claimant was in no better position than
he would have been had no such procia-
nation been issued. But higher than the
civil law was a law OF civilization whlch
demanded that one SO tainted should be
excluded. There were precedents tor such
an appeal TO the higher law.
He cited the case OF Whittemore, VINO
had been guilty OF selling cadetships and
who upon his appearance at the bar OF
the House was rejected as unht 10 SIT IN
the House. The power and the right were
inherent said Taylor. II was only ques-
ton Of propriety. OF wisdom and or prece-
dent In all his investigation and study
Of precedents. Taylor said, he had rallied
TO find a single case where the House had
hesitated 10 assert upon proper occasion
its right 10 halt member at the bar
questioned. He quoted extensively from
"McCreary on Elections" IN support of his
argument He reviewed the cases Of
Proctor Knott, Boyd Winchester and
John VI. Rice Of Kentucky. who had been
stopped at the bar OF the House on the
ground that they were disqualified be-
cause they had been disloyal.
I'VE are told" said Taylor, IN conclu-
sion. his voice ringing out clearly. that
we are about TO create an unhappy prece-
dent. Why, Mr.. Speaker. We are doing
this in the open gaze OF the whole world,
not in a Clostered court. We are the ser
wants Of the people, empowered TO do the
right as we see IL. The public eve is upon
us. the public conscience quickens US. In
that presence We can DO no wrong II we
DO but obey it,
Taylor's concluding words were greeted
with "A storm OF applause, both from the
floor and the galleries.
Richardson. the minority leader. fol-
lowed Taylor. He did not intend he said
10 discuss the merits OF the case. The
question IN issue was as TO whether the
Representative-elect. Roberts, had
not willing 10 reject a Representative
elect who appeared al the bar OF the
House with his credentials in due form.
II he were denied admission precedent
would be created which would rise 10
plague the House in years TO come. The
only constitutional objection raised
naturalization, and that, Richardson as
serted. would not hold. He defed the
other side TO produce single precedent
where objection was raised 10 the ad-
stitutionsl grounds. The precedents cited
were made during the war and were not
10 be relied on In those days the con
stitution was written with the sword.
They had all been since overruled after
the passions following the war had sub
sided. Richardson declared that the mi
nority was in no wise bound by his po-
sition. He spoke for himself alone. He
was willing 10 say that II the charges
against the member-elect were proved he
should favor his expulsion.
If there is one thing the American peo-
pie are a unit upon" he said. 1T is that
the American home shall be preserved in
all its loveliness, sweetness and purity"
(Applause)
But" he proceeded, "it is not wise 10
permit our judgment TO be warped by
public clamor. To do so amounts 10 con-
demnauon without trial
Richardson then brought forward sew
eral precedents in support or his posi-
ton. The first was that OF George -.
Cannon. who appeared in the House as a
delegate-elect from Utah In 1873. Cannon
was a Republican. Almost identically the
same charges now made against Roberts
were made against Cannon. He read
from the speeches OF S. s. Cox OF New
York and other prominent Democrats who
opposed the seating OF Cannon on the
ground that IL would establish a danger
Gus precedent and produce chaos in the
future.
Those Democrats said he. rose
above party prejudice and stood by the
constitution and the right. democratic
applause.)
he cited the case of RAINY. coiored Re
publican from South Carolina, in the
forty-flfth Congress. where the Demo
Gratis had insisted that he should have
quoted from the late President James a.
Garfield in support Of his contention that
where the credentials presented were In
regular form there was no power in the
House to exclude him. Richardson read
the words OF Garfield. which concluded:
There are no personal objections"
But there are personal objections in
the case before the House. interposed
Taylor amid laughter and applause.
Not personal objections 10 the mem
ber-elect" said Richardson: personal
disqualifications only are alleged"
Yes. personal objections" shouted
member on the Republican side. amid an
other outburst.
Richardson read from alleged interviews
with Dalzell OF Pennsylvania: Steele OF
Indiana. and Cannon OF Illinois. in which
they were alleged TO have said that Rob
erts was entitled to take the oath upon
the prima facie evidence OF his creden-
tials. DalZell and Steele denied the in
terviews. Cannon asserted that I'm his
opinion II charges OF ineligibIlity were
made IL was competent for the House
20 receive them now or hereafter.
Roberts himself took the floor in his
own defense after Richardson had con-
cluded. He occupied a conspicuous place
Immediately in front OF the clerks desk
Several legal volumes were piled up I'm
front and a bouquet Of carnations lay
upon his desk. Intense interest was mani
Tested as he arose. Members crowded
about. but were compelled TO return to
their seats. The galleries were hushed
The occupants leaned over 70 listen, eager
10 let no word escape. His voice was soft
and low. but his enunciation was distinct