The St. Louis Republic. [volume] (St. Louis, Mo.) 1888-1919, 1900-01-24
ROBERTS TAKES 4 BOLD STAND.
Continued From Page Ono

! tor IN TIRE early douo. that took place with
/ reference 20 this case or the floor cf the
! House. then declared that l am not hcce
| . represent polygamy, nor 10 defend H.
We have long ago passed that stage aDi
the thing IS out Uf the realm Of dis 'uSsion-
| do not wish my remarks construed as a
! defense OF pulyEaT0y. bUt do want to call
attention TO the nature OF this crime. in
| order that We may ascertain whether IL Is
I So awful In It's aspect as 20 warrant more
/ lawless act than po!yEGmy itself, In c;ier
| 20 rchGke a man VINO had been elected To
| the House of Representatives. Take the
| Jewish people. who were made the depos-
| itoTy Of Gods revelation u humanity.
You shall not find the crime Of polyEamy
( referred 10 among that people as II IS de-
| scribed here, in the report oc the commit
| tee. Evidently It is nahum pr1hlbituIn. II
! Is not nahum in Sc II Il were. you would
| not find the Jewish law enforcing it under
some circumstances. regulating IL under
1 other circumstances. and men after Coils
/ own heart sustaining those relations which
are now supposed to Justify you In closing
| the doors against tbs member from Utah.
| II you 80 TO the teaching OF the Great
| Master. whom, take IL. We all revere, al
| though he denounced every crime. every sin
! that man can commit. yau shall fnd To
word Of his in condemnation Of IT." conduct
| OF the patriaGchs or OF the law ds II Has
! given to Moses and ancient Israel
| Las week. when taking a walk IN the
! residence portion Of your city. | passed
| magnificent heroic statue Of stern oil
Martin Luther. TO whom the nations of
! Western Europe and America owe man no
/ moro than they do 10 him for the religions
| and civil liberty that they now possessed
the founder OF Protestant C'hristcnd5rn
| And that man. upon this subject that =
here 80 much denounced. declared I'm the
| early days OF the Protestant CnsistouLom.
| when he was Informed that his disciple
| Carlstadt was teaching polysany. indeed
must confess that i cannot protest whv4
| one rakes many wives. for II does not CON
tTadict the Scriptures
AN! again in his
| CHURCHs FIGHT letter to Philip de
| Land grave Of HrsSSa.
AGAINST THE regarding the fact
| that Philip had taken
| LAW. q second wife" Ni=
first wife being still
| alive, he said: I'm matters col .. ...-
| mony the LAWS OF Moses are not revoked
| or contradicted 10y the gospels
Yet We built monuments to Luther, not
! v!thstandinS his liberation and defense OF
! tha, form OF marriage. Now. say all these
| things. not for the purpose Of arguing here
] upon the rights Of PolyEamy, but l do say
! what have here remarked for the purpose
| OF fixing II II the minds of members that ii
| is merely g crime because prohibited by
| law | say that the United States had the
| The States have the right 20 make Il Utah
! had tho right 70 make it the law OF that
State. and has done So Consequently II IS
| outside the realm OF discussion further than
| fl this Incidental way"
Mr. Roberts then explained the Mormon
| belief in polygamy. and sail that the
| church thought their creed this point
came within the constitutional inhibition
against laws prohibiting the free exercise
| of religious belief He then continued.
In 1876. desiring 10 put the matter 70 8
| .as, and not to be under the odIum Of vlo-
| lat!ng the Constitution or the laws OF the
country and being confident that tho courts
would sustain the views that they had held
the Mormon Church themselves furnished
q case, furnished the evidence and Witness
es, and brought that case before the courts,
carrying II from one court to another, until
in 1875 the law against this form OF mar
riage was sustained.
1T had been recited ss the chief otserse.
both OF the people ana Of the member from
Utah. that Notwithstanding this decision,
the people continued 10 maintain the right
fulness Of that institution. The Inference
seems TO he that as soCn the decision
of the supreme Court WAS rendered those
people should have dropped their hands
and instantly Contormed to the Law Of the
land. Limited indeed. must have been the
reading OF that man who would suppose
that controversies Of this character would
be so easily DISPOSED Of and that a great
religious conviction would Le Immediately
given upon the decision OF Il court
worthy Of all respec: as the Supreme
Court Of the United States unqucstiouabIy
is. and held in high esteem arnuuntirE al
most to vencraiiyu by my people still we
could not forget the fact that tho court
was still human and liable 70 faIlibilitieg
We could not forget the fact that this
Supreme Court Of ours. high ana exalted
ii IS, frequently rsverses itself We re-
member that It had sustained the corstI-
tutunalty OF the fugitive slave law. and
that its decisions had heen overturned b,-
the people by revolutions in touo-neuts as
well as revolutions in arms. I see upon
the floor of this house a man belonging
10 race who. If absolute suhmissivc7ess
to the decisions of the supreme Court w.s
to he the last Of a controversy would have
been hut a pieCo of goods and chattels il;
this country. instead OF being a member OF
tho House Of Representatives.
80 We taught. be-
,,, heHing as did in
HIS hN the righteousness OF
NEEDS NO DE- our doctrine W.
FENSE. hoped there might
spring up sentiment
which would lead to 4 ,
reversal Of opinion. But 1t did not come }
and Mr.. Roberts. with arms oujstretched 2
appealed to the country not to be too hard (
on the people of Utah.
Vie described the copdi,iar thu, .vt,,,4 I