The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1900-01-05
ROBERTS HEARING. RESUMED
Senator Rawlins Appears as a Cham
plon of the Defendant

| Washington jan 4.-The Roberts in
vestigating committee resumed its ses-
sions today for the purpose of hearing
! arguments and bringing the inquiry to
| an early conclusion 1t was expected
/ that Ex-Secretary John G. Carlisle
would be present to sum up the case
against Roberts and that Mr.. Roberts in
person would make the argument in his
own behalf Word came from Mr.. Car
Isle, however, that he had mot under
stood that his personal presence was de-
I sired. but ne was ready to submit writ
ten arguments on any of the questions
involved
Chairman Taylor (Ohio) stated that the
statement of a witness absent in Utah
had been received. but as Mr.. Roberts
declined to admit it in an informal man
ner, the matter would have to be taken
up later.
Mr. Roberts said he wished to present
matter tending to show the antitrust
/ worthiness of the witnesses appearing
against him 1t included published
card signed by Thomas ]. Brandon dis
claiming having given out certain infor-
nation relative 10 Roberts; also court
party. Mr. Roberts also offered a tele-
gram from the proprietors of the Salt
Lake Herald concerning the testimony
of Mr. McDaniels. Chairman Taylor ex-
cluded the telegram, however, saying
there was no color of Eight or propriety
in receiving a telegram as testimony, in
view of Mr. Roberts refusal to admit the
statement Of the absent Utah witnesses.
Mr.. Schroeder. head of the Gentle dele
cation to oppose Roberts, then opened
the argument against Roberts The
argument was largely technical and was
divided under three general heads, viz:
First whether or not the member-elect
has the constitutional qualifications, in
Guiding citizenship; second, whether or
not the constitutional provisions as to
citizenship include one who has impaired
his citizenship by crime or unlawful
status and whether Mr.. Roberts has so
impaired his citizenship; third, whether
a member-elect has the statutory quail
fications. and whether the house has the
power to establish qualifications beyond
those in the constitution Mr.. Schroeder
read from many law books concerning
these propositions.
1.-The evidence clearly shows" pro-
ceeded Mr.. Schroeder, "that since 1880,
Mr. Roberts has been in the status of
polygamist and the question is as to the
effect of this status" He said that while
Utah was territory there was no doubt
as TO Roberts disfranchisement under
the Edmunds and Tucker act. And when
Utah was admitted to statehood; Mr.
Schroeder contended, Mr.. Roberts citf-
zenship was still impaired. The status
of polygamoy was such that Roberts
could not relieve himself from it without
some affirmative act
As to the right of the house to exclude,
Mr.. Schroeder said: Suppose raving
maniac should present himself at the bar
of the house and ask admission on
proper credentials, could not the house,
in self-protection, deny him admission?
Suppose a man afflicted with leprosy pre-
sented himself, would not the house have
power to keep him OUT"
Mr.. Schroeder said Roberts had admit
ted his relationship with his plural
wives. He had pluckily said he would
"be id if he would give up his wives.
This is an offense against the public
morals as well as the law. and Mr.. Rob-
erts should BE excluded from a seat.
At this point a recess was taken until
2 o'clock.
The afternoon hearing was enlivened
when Senator Rawlins of Utah was
drawn into discussion of polygamy-
Mr.. Schroeder had continued his argu-
ment, when Mr. Rawlins interrupted to
correct a detail as to when certain state
ments were given before congressional
committee relative TO polygamy. Chair
man TAYLOR thereupon asked Mr. Raw
Inns. who was once delegate from
Utah. If it was not understood. at the
time the state was admitted, that
polygamy was at an end.
1T was my understanding, said MI.
Rawlins, that the solemnization of
polygamous marriages was interdlcted
bv the Mormon church and that this
would hace a saIutary effect in determin
ing the practice But 1 did not hold
out to congress that family relations al
ready established would be broken up.
Mr.. Tayler asked if it was expected
that the law against poygamy would be
violated. Mr.. Rawlins answered that II
was thought there might be SPORADIC
cases but that. as general system,
poIv gamous relations would gradually
terminate.
DO you think" continued Mr.. Taylor.
that Utah would have ben admitted II
If had been understood that IN a Few
wears Utah would send 10 congress
man maintaining polygamous relations?
Mr. RawIins said he did not think con-
gress believed the practice Of polygamy
would be continued. The course OF
events in recent years had clearly shown
that the practice would end in time
Did YOU not believe. and state at the
time" asked Mr. Tayler, that the
polygamous system was dead and
buried?"
Mr.. Rawlins did not recall such state
ments.
Mr.. ATayler read from the speeches Of
Mr. Rawlins of those days 70 the effect
that while poIygamy had once existed.
he world was progressing and the Gus
tom was becoming ancient history
Mr. Roberts here asked 70 put ques-
tion n Senator Rawlins. and asked;
vii! ask the senator II he thinks con
rress understood al the time Utah vas
admitted that the president q the United
states would appoint TO federal Offices
il The state Of Utah men practicing
polygsmy?'
There was some question as 20 Wheih-