The Portland daily press., 1879-04-05
Appointed Senators.

The presidents that might bs appealed 10 in
coming to decision of the case of Mr.. Bell, the
appointed Senator from New Hampshire, are
not altogether on the side of his right to seat.
The truth is, that there are presidents on both
sides; the more recent are in favor OF the posi-
ton which the Democrs tic committee has TAX
en-. Indeed, we believe there is no case since
1926 of Senator being admitted on an ap.
pointment at the beginning of term. Prior
to that year there were several cases of such
admission, but at the beginning, of the special
session Of the Senate in March, 1925, Mr.. John
Quincy Adams's term as President having just
begups Mr.. LanmaD, who had served full
term as Senator from Connecticut, presented
himself as his own successor by appoin tment
OF Governor Wolcott. The legislature had
made no choice, and unless Mr.. Lanmau were
mitted the State of Connecticut would be par
italy unrepresentad for whole year. Objec-
tion was made, and committee was appointed
to look up the precedents. A report was made
two or three days later, showing that all the
cases presenting the same question before that
time had been decided in favor OF the right OF
the person appointed to take his seat Never
theless, after a full discussion, in which Mr..
Lanman himself was allowed to participate,
the Senate voted by % to 10 that ho was p0s
properly entitled to admission.
Probably this decision is entitled to quite as
much weight ia constitutional sense, as eth
er of the former adjacations which the Senate
dsregarded ia 1925 The Washington National
Intelleencer on the day following the vote
says that Gan important constitutional ques-
ton was yesterday decided by the Senate.
*This is the first time the question has
been adjudicated under such circumstances as
to form precedent; and we presume it may
now be taken as q settled construction OF the
constitutional provision, that vacancy must
have literally happened" 1t says that on
the only previous occasion when the question
was raised all the federalist members voted
for the admission of the Senator. and all the
REPUBLICAN members voted against him; and il
very reasonably doubts II a decision under
dent of great weight. 1t may also be re.
marked that two of the three members OF
the committee who reported that all the prece.
dents were 10 favor of seating Mr.. Lanman,
voted that he was not entitled to the seat 1t
was not strictly party division in 1925, though
most OF the Senators who were opposed 10 the
President voted against Mr.. Lapmap, together
with some of the administration members
Benton says in his "Thrty Years View" tina
the subsequent practice of the Senate has con
formed to the rule adopted IN the case of Mr.
Lanman, As to that we cannot say. No sim
liar case has arisen in recent TINES, possibly
partly because it has not been supposed that
person appointed to begin senatorial tern
would be received.
Gratis of to-day have full authority in the prece
dents Of their own party in the past to warrap
them in excluding Mr.. Bell now, and suct
precedent IS entirely sufficient for their pur
poses Under the circumstances, it is hardl!
worth while to discuss the matter on the brOa(
principles of constitutional Interpretation
The case was closed as soon as the question
Waa raiaad