The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1900-01-14
THE ROBERTS CASE.
Roberts and the Postmastars.

4lAAtlE Herald.
In discussing the Roberts case many
people who are evidently ignorant of the
facts condemn the conference.-the for
dragging into the premises the ap-
DOintments Of Mr.. John c. Graham. post
master at Provo. and Mr.. Orson Smith.
postmaster at Logan. These critics say
that it was very "babyishn of Mr.. Rob
erts to expose others in his efforts to jus
tify himself. They lose sight Of two very
important facts, viz:
l. Mr.. Roberts did not give 20 the pub
lie the information that President Nc
Kinley had appointed these two gentle
men to Office in spite Of protests that they
'Sere living in poiygamy.
? Mr.. Roberts reference to these ap-
pointments, after they had been made d
matter Of public gossip by the declara-
I tions of others, was for the sole purpose
OF showing. by reference to the highest
authority of the land, that there was no
contract between the people of Utah and
the United States which required that
men who had been living in Dolygamy
/ previous to the church manifesto should
repudiate their plural wives as a pre-
necessary qualification to the holding OF
Office.
The fact is that the first public declara-
/ ton exposing these appointments was
made by Senator Rawlins, through the
Associated Press. some days before con-
greSs met His motive Was as free from
| intended harm to President Mckinley
apDointees as was Mr.. -.oberts' subse-
quent reference to them. They were cited
as conclusive evidence that there could
not have been such a compact as some
/ people were claiming. else the president
would not have openly violated it by these
appointments.
When Mr.. Roberts made his speech on
the floor of congress he read excerpts
/ from aletter written by Hon. r. " Bas-
kin Of the state supreme court. In. this
I letter Mr.. Baskin stated that President
/ Mckinley had appointed Mr. Graham and
/ Mr.. Smith, and possibly other poIyga-
mists. to office in Utah, and that this
was, or ought to be, taken as satisfae-
/ tory evidence that no compact existed
/ such as Mr.. Roberts prosecutors alleged.
! Neither did Judge Baskin mention these
/ appointments to injure MeSsrs. Grahar.
/ and Smith, as some naTrOw-minded per-
! sons have insinuated. His purpose was
/ the same as that which actuated Senator
/ Rawlins in the first public declaration Of
the fact.
/ It was Judge Baskin's letter, or at least
that part of 1t which mentioned the ap-
/ pointment Of the polygamous pOstmas-
tiers. that occasioned the acrimOnius run
ming debate in the house of representa-
tives; and AR Roberts subsequent refer
} eneee and statements in this connection
3 were really brought out BIZ questions from
Representative GrOsvenor and other mem
bers. who feigned great indignation at
what they characterized as an attempt to
/ cast odium upon the president of the
I United States.
I sat in the members gallery and wit
messed and listened to the proceedings on
/ that memorable day. Mr.. Grosvenor
with 6. well assumed air of injured dig
nifty, asked Mr.. Roberts if he intended
I the house to understand that the presi-
/ dent had appointed pOlygamists to Office,
knowing at the time of making the ap-
I pointments that the gentlemen were po-
+ lygamists.
z The member from Utah in his answers
( to this and succeeding questions evoked
4 a perfect storm of applause on the Demo
/ cratic side. 4 mean to state" said Mr..
Roberts. that the president made these
appointments over the protests contain
/ cd in affidavits fled both with the presi-
dent and with the senate committee. set
/ ting forth that these gentlemen were po-
/ lygamists; and that he had quite as relia-
bic information regarding their status as
this house has respecting mine"
But" interrupted Mr.. Grosvenor. "they
had not been convicted. had they?"
/ Neither has the member from Utah
( been convicted" retOrted Mr.. Roberts
amid thunderous applause. while the adj
ministrations champion retired in great
] confusion and embarrassment.
1 It is, in my opinion. an exhibition OF
the most contemplate, petty animus for
/ persons and papers to attempt to convict
! Mr.. Roberts Of an intentional wrong
/ against Messrs. Graham and Smith. Peo-
pie who know him well viii understand his
motive in referring to the matter and viii
not be preiudiced by the narrow, IN
truthful insinuations of his enemies.
1t is deeply to be regretted that our rep
resentative-elect will not be permitted to
hold mis- seat. or indeed. to take it tempo
rariIy as / am personally convinced that
the storm starters and the storm pro.
rnoters have practically accomplished
( their purpose, and that congress viii de-
clare the seat vacant; for Mr.. Roberts. II
my judgment. is the peer both in point OF
morality and ability Of the great majority
. Of the members Of this congress. He has
I made many friends for Utah and for him
/ self. He is regarded as a brainy, eour-
/ ageous, brilliant man. His conduct IL
Washington has been dignified. He Ia.
not fawned for favOTs. but has relied OF
I the righteousness of his cause to triumph
However much people here may differ il
their opinions as to the pr0priety Of hi:
nomination and election, and while sons
win perhaps even rejoice when his fina
rejection takes place, still the vast ma,
jority Of our citizens will, believe, agree
with me is this: That TO man in the state
Of Utah could be sent to Washington who
would distinguish himself and honor tn,
state more than Mr.. Roberts would hav,
done had he been permitted to take and
retain the seat in congress to which III,
people Of a sovereign state elected him
and to which all fair minded men be.iev,
him to be lawfully and rightfully en-
/ titled. D. c. DUNBAR.
Salt Lake City. Jan. Il, 1900.