Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1904-04-29

a wrong impression was created, The
idea obtained was that he lost In the
first case because he did not subscribe
TO the Church rule mentioned, and sue
ceeded at the next because he was In
harmony with the Church, the infer
ence being that the Church controlled
in both instances. Therefore the fol-
lowing colloquy is quoted from the
official report:
Senator Bailey. You were defeated?
"Mr. Roberts | was defeated.
Senator Bailey. You were on the
regular Democratic ticket?
"Mr. Roberts. Yes, sir.
senator Bailey. At that election the
whole State ticket was chosen?
MIR. Roberts, No. sir; II was de-
feated.
Senator Bailey. State officers were
not chosen at that time?
MIR, Roberts, Yes, sir; State OFF,
GERS were nominated and elected, but
the whole Democratic ticket was de-
feated.
Senator Bailey. When you were
next a candidate, were there any state
officers elected at that time?
"Mr, Roberts think the whole
Democratic ticket was elected,
Senator Bailey So that, as mat
ter OF fact you shared the fate Of your
party on each occaslon2
"Mr. Roberts on each occasion"
Senator Bailey And II there was
any religious influence excrted II was
exerted against the whole party and
not against you because Of your partic-
ular posltion2"
"Mr. Roberts! | think that Is right,
and II might add some light to the mat
ter II were to say that In the first
election | ran, | think II las, some-
thing over a thousand votes ahead OF
the Democratic ticket
But Mr., Bailey, stlll inbued with the
popular idea about "Church influence"
returned to the charge, and endeavored
to make 1t appear that II Mr.. Roberts
was not personally defeated or elected
by the Church II was the party that
failed or succeeded by its influence, as
follows:
Senator Balley--I believe in your
first election under the constitution the
Republicans carried the legislature; In
the next one the Democrats carried IL,
and probably in the next one the Re-
publlcans carried 1t?
MIR. Roberts--Yes.
Do A.tta.tn /. l, IN
time next.
Mr. Roberts-I hope so, Senator.
Senator Bailey-I am free to say that
that condition. which had occurred to
me- had been partially explained In my
mind by the probability OF church in
reference. and that whichever side
prevailed was the side upon which the
church cast its influence. That was the
reason | wanted some explanation Of
the statement. | understand. Of course,
that It might happen without any fix
ed and definite political creed, they
might yeer from party to party but II
still appears TO me that men might be
a little more constant in their preju-
dlces, even II not In their convictions,
than to change every election.
In the cross-examinatlon, however,
both these points were cleared up
through questions put by Mr.. Van Colt,
as thus appears In the official report.
"Mr. Van Cott-NIr Roberts, when
the first election was held under the
Utah State constitution were all Of the
state officers who were elected Repub-
licans?
MIR Roberts-All the Republican
State officers We're elected.
mir Van Cott--Passng TO the next
election, In 1896, was that when the sill
yer question was agItating the West?
"Mr Roberts-lt was
"Mr Van Cott-And the Democrats
carried that election?
Mr. Roberts-They did.
mr. Van Cott-And in 1898 the same?
"Mr Roberts-Yes sir
MI Van Coffin 1900 was the Sec
ond State election?
Mr. Roberts-Yes, sir
Mr. Van Cott-And did the Republl-
cans carry that election?
Mr. Robcrts-They did.
Mr. Van Cott-Haye the State on.
GERS In Utah always been Republican?
Mr. Roberts-Always.
Mr. Van Cott-Wlth the exception OF
the legislature elected In 1896?
MT Roberts, had IN mind. Of
course, the administrative offices. ex-
cept, Of course, the legislature on one
occasion, or two, perhaps.
MI Van Cott-That was during 1896.
when the silver question was on?
Mr. ROberts-lt was"
This disposed Of Mr.. Baileys notion
that the people Of Utah "veered from
party to party and the change was
without definite political cause. Mr.
Roberts was questioned further as to
the rule Of the Church about which
there has been so much misunderstand-
ing;
"Mr Van Cott..-Do you understand
there Is anything in this rule that pre-
vents you from reslgnng at any time?
"Mr Notwithstanding at all.
"Mr Van Cott-Nou are free TO RI.
sign whenever You desire?
Mr. Roberts-Absoutcly.
Mr. Van Cott-Wlthout getting a
leave OF absence from the church?
Mr. Roberts--Yes, sir
MI Van Cott-Do you understand.
Mr.. Roberts that this rule as applied
10 the members Of the church--that Ia.
the high ollcers-hos any different ap-
plleation than II would have as a rule
that was promulgated by a railroad
company, to the effect that lis employ.
es shall not seek political preferment.
and neglect their railroad duties?
Mr. Roberts understand that 10
be the exact basis Of that rule.
II viii be remembered by close road
ers Of the testimony ot the first hearing
that among other bits OF gossip related
by Mr.. r. Il, Critchlow. he made this
statement under oath.