The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1900-01-24

| they now possess-the founder of Pro-
testant Christendom. And that man,
| upon this subject that is here so much
| denounced, declared in the early days of
| Protestant Christendom, when he was
| informed that his disciple Carlsbad
was teaching polygamy, 1 indeed must
| confess that 1 can not protest when
| one takes many wives, for 1t does not
/ contradict the scriptures.
''And again in his letter to Phillip,
1 Landgraave of Hesse, remarking upon
| the fact that Phillip had taken a sec
-ond wife, his first wife being still hv-
/ ing, he said: In matter of matrimony
the laws of Moses are not revoked or
contradicted by the gospels.
yet we build monuments to Luther
Notwithstanding his liberation and de-
| tense of that form of marriage. Now
say sll these things not for the pur-
| pose of arguing here upon the rights
| of polygamy but do say what have
| here remarked for the purpose of fixing
| it in the minds of members that it is
merely crime because prohibited by
| law. I say that the United States had
| the right to make that law if they
] wished to. The states have the right to
make it. Utah had the right to make it
| the law of that state, and has done
| so. Consequently it is outside of the
| realm of discussion further than in
this incidental way
Mr.. Roberts then explained the Nor
mon belief in polygamy. and, said the
| church thought their creed on this
| point came within the constitutional
/ inhibition against laws prohibiting the
| free exercise of religious Dellef. He
| then continued:
I'm 1876, desiring to put the matter to
| test and not to be under the odium
| of violating the constitution or the
laws of the country and being confident
| that the courts would sustain the views
| that they had held, the Mormon church
| themselves furnished case. furnished
the evidence and witnesses and brought
| that case before the courts, carrying 1t
| from one court to another, until in 1875
| the law against this form of marriage
1 was sustained.
ut has been recited as the chief
| offense both of the people and of the
| member of Utah that Notwithstanding
| this decision the people still continue
/ to maintain the rightfulneSs of that in
| stitiftfon. The inference seems to be
| that as soon as the decision of the SUI
| preme court was rendered those people
| should have dropped their hands and
| instantly conformed to the law of the
| land Limited indeed must have been
| the reading of that man who would
| suppose that controversies of this char
| acter would be so easily disposed of
| and that a, great religious conviction
| would be given up on the decision of a
| court Worthy of all respect as the
| supreme court of the United States I'M
| uuestionably is, and held in high es-
| TEEN amounting almost to veneration
! by my people, still we could not forget
| the fact that the court was still human
and liable to liabilities. We could not
| forget the fact that this supreme
| court of ours, high and exalted as it
| is, frequently reverses itself We re-
| membered that it had sustained the
constitutionality of the fugitive slave
law, and that it's decision had been
| overturned by the people by revolu-
| tions in tents as well as revolutions in
1 arms. I see upon the floor of this
! house man belonging to race who,
-e-fr ncc RI
| cision of the supreme court was to be
| the last Of controversy would have been
! but a piece of goods and chattels in
! this country instead of being member
| of the house of representatives
! $50 we thought said Mr.. Roberts,
| 'sbelievfng as we did in the righteous
ness of our doctrine. We hoped there
| might spring up sentiment Whlcn
| would lead to a reversal of opinion.
But it did not come, and Mr.. Roberts,
| with arms .outstretched, appealed to
| the country not to be too hard on the
| people of Utah.
! listed in Utah in 1882 as reign of ter
| ror. The federal courts were being
used, he said, to drive women into exile.
| A man was brought before the court
/ He was told that he need not go to
\ prison if he would give up polygamy.
| but then" said Mr.. Roberts dramatf-
| cally, Il felt it would have been de-
sorting the cause of God to have
| agreed"
A scattering wave of applause passed
| over the galleries at this utterance, but
| was quickly drowned with Kisses.
IT had rather had my flesh hewn from
my limbs than to have been untrue to
| my people. 1t was this feeling that
| was the incentive to the laWleSSneSS,
| such as it was.
/ aT3iit.'' he continued. ''the time came
when the Mormons of Utah were obliged
| to submit and did submit. Since then
| there had not been a single plural mar
riage in Utah. The plural relations had
been broken up in many cases. Death
| had kindly solved the problem for some
| and the heartaches it left for some
made them wish the same end had come
for them He insisted that the com
| pact with the United States had been
| observed. That polygamy had practic-
| ally ceased; that the Mormon church
| had given up polygamy in good faith.
Mr.. Roberts said he had been in pub
| lie life for twenty years and was not
| driven to the defense of his moral char
acter. He was not here representing
the Mormon church. He had received
| a greater number of votes from gen.
tiles than Mormons.
You can neither exclude nor expel
me-" said Mr.. Roberts in conclusion. It
will cling SO hard to the pillars of liber-
ty that you shall not drag me from
them without bringing down the whole
temple" applause and hisses).
II have lived with good conscience
until this day and am sensible of no
act of shame upon my part You can
brand me with shame and send me
forth, but / shall leave with head erect
and brow undaunted and walk the
earth as angels walk the clouds. If you
violate the constitution all the shame
will be with you"
There was a great outburst of ap-
plause in the galleries when Mr.. Rob-
erts concluded. Many of the ladies in
the galleries were especially demonstra-
tive.