The Topeka State Journal

IT IS UNANIMOUS.

Whole Committee Agrees That Roberts Should Not Sit.

Washington, Jan. 20.—The reports of the special committee of investigation in the case of Brigham H. Roberts of Utah were presented to the house to-day. The majority report, signed by Chairman Taylor and six of his associates, is a voluminous document, and is accompanied by a summary of the law and facts. It gives the details of the hearings, the ample opportunities afforded to Mr. Roberts to present his case, his refusal to testify and the unanimous finding of facts heretofore published. It proceeds:

The committee is unanimous in its belief that Mr. Roberts ought not to remain a member of the house of representatives. A majority are of the opinion that he ought not to become a member, that the house has a right to exclude him. A minority are of the opinion that the proper course of procedure is to permit him to be sworn in and then expel him by a two-thirds vote, under the constitutional provision providing for expulsion.

"Your committee desire to assert with the utmost positiveness at this point that not only is the proposition of expulsion as applied to this case against precedent but that exclusion is entirely in accord with principle, authority and legislative precedent and not antagonistic to any legislative action which the house of representatives has ever taken.

"For convenience we present herewith before proceeding to extended argument in support of the committee's resolution the following summary:

"Upon the facts stated the majority of the committee assert that the claimant ought not to be permitted to take a seat in the house of representatives, and that the seat to which he was elected ought to be declared vacant.

"The minority, on the other hand, assert that he ought to be sworn in, in order that if happily two-thirds vote therefor he may be expelled.

"Three distinct grounds of disqualification are asserted against Roberts:

1. By reason of his violation of the Edmunds law.

2. By reason of his notorious and defiant violation of the law of the land, of the decisions of the supreme court, and of the proclamations of the president, holding himself above the law and not amenable to it. No government could possibly exist in the face of such practices. He is in open war against the laws and institutions of the country whose congress he seeks to enter. Such an idea is intolerable. It is upon the principle asserted in this ground that all cases of exclusion have been based.

3. His election as representative is an explicit and offensive violation of the understanding by which Utah was admitted as a state."