The Butler weekly times. (Butler, Mo.) 1881-1918, 1900-10-11
T-r ROBERTS CASE.

Brigham II. Roberts his seat in con
gress. which was being contested
because he was polygamist.
After raising the question Mr.
Jurden did not state Judge De,
Almonds full position on that ques,
ton, but told only part of the truth
and left. or tried TO leave, the impress
sion that the Judge sanctioned pO.
| lvgamy
He could have told, if his desire for
fairness had equaied his greed for
votes. that a. q member of the House
judiciary Committee to which the
Roberts case was referred, Judge De-
Almond, a democrat, and Mr.. Little
field. republican, the successor to
Thos. r. Reed. from Maine, both
learned lawyers, made a minority
report, based on constitutional
grounds. for the seating of Mr. Rob
erts. The following is the resolution
they offered as a substitute for that
proposed by the majority:
"REsOLvED. that Brigham H.
Roberts, having been duly elected a
representative III the Fifty-siXth con-
gresS from the state of Utah, with
the qualifications requisite for adj
mission to the House as such, is en-
titled, as a constitutional right, to
take the oath OF office prescribed for
members-elect. his status as a pOlyg-
amist, unla wfullr cOha biting with
plural wives, affording constitutional
grounds for expulsion, but not for
exclusion from the House
And if the House shall hold with Us
and swear in Mr.. Roberts as a MEM
Der we shall. as soon as recognition
can be had offer a resolution to
expel him as pOlygamist, unlaw- |
fully cohabiting with plural wives .
In support OF this resolution both |
Mr.. DeArmond and Mr.. Littlefield |
made speeches which were pronounc-
ed by the best lawyers in the country |
because their prem |
ises were true and conclusions cor
rect.
, In that resolution Judge DeArmOnd |
stood pledged TO offer Il resolution,
az soon az recognition could be OBJ
tanned, to eXpel Roberts from the
house as u polygamists. He also
this pledge i'll his speech
Mr.. Roberts said that both the ma
jOrity and minority wanted to get
rid of him but the first wanted to
mob him and the minority wanted
TO dispose OF him according to the
forms Of law.
The American, edited by Wharton
Baker, now pOpulist nominee for
president, said editorially:
by vote of three to one TIE
House decided TO exclude him. in
stead OF admitting him and then
expelling HIM.
In thus acting, and it would have
been little different if the minority
had had their way, the House has
asserted its right to try member
elect for any crime he may be charged
with having committed in his com
munity for which he has not been
,alled to account i'll his own commu-
nifty, and finding him guilty, exclude
him from the House. To our mind
his is u dangerous assertion of
power, for under the right assumed
n the Roberts case. 81 partisan ma
GRITTY, listening to charges brought
against members-elect, charges of t,
which they had not been found guilty i
BY their own people, might exclude
my and all such members-elect of /
he minority as they might choose"
Editorial correspondence by Arthur :
icEwen said: The great vote for
Neluslon was undoubtedly a rebuke !
o the MOrmons that will last them c
or all time, but it was also melan- ! !
holy proof OF how scant in the a
louise is that kind of courage which Z
needed to face even for a passing a
Iour the roar OF a popular clamor
hat Is sound in intention. but
etestable in its contempt for the
estraints of law.
The associate Press, commenting t
pon Mr.. DeArmond' s latitude. said,
There is scarcely IA lawyer in con- r
.ress who has not admitted in pri- K
ate that this was the legal, orderly. |,
ignltied and safe method of reaching K
he case a
We could go on almost indefinite ,
quoting from the records and ed
-orial comments of all classes of b
apers, to show that Judge Dear, 4
lond had no idea of retaining i
'oberts in congress. but desired his :,
awful expulsion and not an illegal
xclusion -