The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1882-05-03

nrovide. under the Constitution, for legis
liative represe ntstion OF Territories; bu
!. is de- led that Congress can bind III
House Nv any law respecting the qu%I
ifcsiI nf a Delegate. 1t cannot stfix
! y ,.life, ton by Law for a Delegate ant
Inc Al Y House except the one asserting
tbererr The qualification OF member
IL fr,d by the Constitution. Hence they
n.av not be added to or taken from hy
Law. But as to Delegates, they are no
| constitutional officers. Their qua iic4tIor
d4ren6s entirely upon such standard n
thu bodv to which they are attached may
maze. It is urged this means TT ga
On, LITIGATION. This is ad nitted, but tina
legal qualification is RENTED to the BODY
t. which the Delegate is attached
because It is the sole judge OF that req Al.
si;ion. R-zzzk
Now, I have always understood t
legs! qualification to mean qualification
fixed and regulated by law. But hers
wa have illegal" qualification prescribed
uY NO law, and the right 10 pass any Ia ="
fxi g such a qualification absolutely
deni d
Nj. Calkins. = If the gentlem N
from Tennessee will allow me to interrupt
him, wcu d remark :hst he seems to
Confuse two substantive propositions
VIII C have blended into one. He will
see and will anybody who will look
that there are two classes ofqusliica'i ms
mentioned IN The Constitution. The
eusI fcations nf one class are those
prescribed, which every member must
possess 81 the time he IS elected. The
qualifications, or rather Disqualification s,
of the other class are III n nj may alta ch
to the mem Der # er o-ing elected; on
account of which disqualifcatiOns be may
be- expelled; so that IN oeAling with Il
Delegate, excluding him from the con-
stitutional provisions and renting him,
if YOU please, to the general psrlia-
mentary law, which gives To every legis-
lative Body the right to judge IF the
qualifications of It's own mem bsrs, the
question of his legal qualification is re-
mitted to the body to which the Delegate
is attached, which always has had the
power residing. in every Legislature of
prescribing the qualification OF its own
members, power which it cannot divide
with aay other.
Mr.. Hammond, of Georgia. Does the
gentleman base that proposition on the
right TO expel member
Mr.. House. l understand the idea of
the gentleman from Indiana. 1 under
stand that the qualification a member
must possess under the Constitution the
gentleman danies Congress has the right
to prescribe to a Delegate.
Mr.. Hammond, Of Georgis-Will the
gentleman from Tennessee allow the gen.
tlemsn from Indiana to answer my ques.
%iAn har ha mt that r,rov,oe1tSo-
the right to expel member?
SIR. Calkins-No, Sit; I put it on this
basis -
Mr.. Hammond. OF Georgia-You used
the word ''expel."
Mr.. Calkins-I did, in my remarks
just now. l put it on this ground, that
where any legislative body has the sole
and exclusive right to judge Of the quail
fcations of its members and where it is
by constitutional restrictions,
as l claim this body is with reference to
delegates, the two classes ofquaIifcations
which are recognized in the Constitution
are consolidated in the House; and the
House being relieved from that restric- !
ton which requires a two-thirds vote to /
expel for any cause, may exclude by a !
vote.
Mr.. House, will go on. I am per-
fectly willing the gentleman from In
diana should have an opportunity TO |
make his explanation. I do not think |
have done his argument sny injustice, |
Dor do 1 see his explanation has helped |
1is argument st all. quote further from
.he report:
1T [mesning the Housed is unfettered |
by constitutional restrictions and cannot |
yield any part of this prerOgative to the
)ther branch of Congress or the Execu-5
i've. If it could the right to amend
would follow, and the House might find /
tself in the awkward position of having
he fixing of qualifications to delegates, or
he Executive vetoing laws fixing them,
md by this means the power which by
he Constitution resides aloha 10 the
House would be entirely abrOgated."
Mr.. Speaker, l staod silent in the pres
nee of this logic and this law. The cool
less with which this report assumes the
rery point in dispute and the dOgmstic
manner in which objections are disposed
{ are really refreshing. But SIS a matter
f curiosity I would like to inquire what
over is alluded to as residing under the
Constitution alone in the House, and
which would be abrogsted by allowing
be Senate and the Executive to have q
dice in passing law fixing the quslif-
atoms, of delegates? Certainly not the
over vested in the House by the Consti-
ltion to judge of the election, returns,
nd qualifications of its own mem bers,
IT the report expressly takes the ground
nat this clause of the Constitution has
o reference whatever to territorial DEL
gate, and as this clause of the Coustitu-
on is not referred to by the report am
tterly at loss to conjecture what cOnsti-
ltional right Of the House would be
brogsted by the passage of the law al
lded to. In fact, in the report it is
aimed that the House is wholly unfet-
red by any constitutional restrictions
dealing with delegate, and yet it Is
serted that if the Senate and Executive
g allowed to have any voice in a law
the qualifications of dele
lte a constitutional power which resides
one in the House would be sbrogated.
give it up. am unable to comprehend
q logic Of the report; it may he my
isfortune and not the fault of the aa-
or.
(TO be continaled.)