Iron County register., 1900-02-08
NUMBER 80.
The Roberts Case.

and big rent has been torn in the
Constitution. The conduct of the Re
publican majority in the House o.
Representatives, in the Roberts case
fittingly characterizes the intelligence,
courage and patriotism of that body.
Upon the assem- milling of Congress
the Republican majority were thrown
into fit of Mysteries by the number
and magnitude of the petitions sent in
by the people demanding the expulsion
of Mr.. Roberts from that body because
of his being pelygamist. In their
excitement they displayed their weak
ness and branded the majority party
in the lower House of Congress as be-
ing composed of men of small intel
lectual caliber, defective in morals.
and incompetent to represent the great
American people.
Think of the intellectual character
and moral worth of men who doubted
that Roberts would be expelled from
Congress by the necessary two-thirds
vote if found guilty! just think of the
Republican members of Congress be-
lieving that it was necessary to stop
Mr.. Roberts from taking the oath of
Office in order that a majority vote
might exclude him from the House on
the ground that if permitted to take
| the oath Democratic votes could not
be secured to expel him. because Mr..
Roberts was Democrat!
The Scriptures tell US that '.from
the abundance of the heart the mouth
speaketh." These men, in searching
their own hearts, must have found
partisan bias there strong enough to
condone, on political grounds. the of
tense charged against Mr.. Roberts be-
fore they were able to even suspect
that Democrats could be guilty of such
baseness.
Under the Constitution the Repre-
sentative duly accredited from the
state of Utah had the same right to be
sworn in as that of any other member.
The trick of having a number of men,
bers sworn in first who, after being
sworn in, could object to the oath be-
ing administered to MIR. Roberts, and
by an &c parte vote decide that he
should not be permitted to take the
oath, is not only gross violation of
the Constitution, but a dangerous pre-
cedent, one that may, in the future,
cause much trouble.
Among the Republican majority
were men supposed to be eminent
lawyers, some of whom have served
upon the bench in their respective
states. Nearly every one of these
privately admitted that the course of
procedure adopted in the Roberts case
was wrong and dangerous. but for
purely party reasons yielded their per-
sonal convictions to the demand of the
party leaders.
If the Republican majority were
composed of men of high intelligence
and sturdy morals, they would not
have found it in their hearts to have
adjudged the minority as they did. If
they were composed of men of high
order of intelligence and great political
sagacity, they would have adopted an
entirely different course; they would |
have given the Democrats an oppor-
tunity to make the marriage relation |
and the sanctity of the home an issue
In politics, if they were not aboye so
doing or dared to do so.
The result, after thorough investi-
cation before a committee, was that
the minority desired that Mr.. Roberts
should be regularly sworn in and after
wards expelled. This sentiment was
universal on the Democratic side, and
under this mode of procedure the en-
tire Democratic vote would have been
cast for expulsion. But the majority,
having made bad break in a fit of
frenzy and excitement, were deter
mined to persist in it and see it through. I
They therefore insisted upon a report
that Mr.. Roberts be not al
lowed to take the oath of Office or be-
come member OF their body in the
full sense. The minority report, which
was voted on, is as follows:
ResoEued. That Brigham H. Roberts,
having been duly elected Representa-
tive in the Fitty-sixth Congress from
the state of Utah, with the qualifica-
tions requisite for admission to the
House as such, is entitled, as a Con-
stitutional right, TO take the oath of
Office prescribed for members-elect;
his status as polygamist, unlawfully
with plural wives, afforaing
Constitutional grounds for expulsion,
but not for exclusion from the House.
Upon this resolution the vote was 81
in Its favor and 244 against it, 90 mem
bers not voting. Those who voted for
this resolution were mainly Democrats,
a few Republicans joining them under
the lead of Mr.. Littlefeld, of Maine,
who made an able speech in its defense
and distinguished himself above his
colleagues by defending the Constitu-
ton OF his country.