The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1882-05-24
THE DEBATE.
Cont RuaGiOn of 1he Cam n
Campbell Contest in tnt
House.
MOuItOn's Argument.
Continued from Tuesdays Daily.

order Of this House it was referred to the
election committee. That committee has
made repoet Let me ssy further to
gentlemen on both sides that this case is
governed by the law and the rules ofeyi-
dence applicable to it, precisely in the
same way as any other election case.
Applying the rules of law 10 the facts 10
tae C So, as l hope to do, 1t SCENE TO me
that no lawyer can hesitate for q single
n omenL ss to the right Of Mr.. Cannon to
seat in this House
NY friend here from Michigan Mr..
Horrl says that he does not propose to
trouble MS brain about the Constitution
or the laws. If it is only stated to bira
here, or be knows. that q man presenting
himself for admission is a pOlygsmist
that settles the whole question with him,
without reference to the Constitution or
anything else.
On the other haYd, my friend from
Tennessee Mr.. Pettibo0el makes the sd
mission that if Mr.. Cannon should come
here as a representative from q state al
though covered all over with the infamy
Of polygamy, he would be bound to vote
10 admit him among US. There is the
difference between the two gentlemen.
The gentleman from Tennessee holds that
he would be bound under the Cons'itu-
ton and laws to admit Mr.. Cannon il he
presented himself Is repre-
sentative from 8 state. / say, too. that
be would be bound to admit him, as
polygsmy is no disqualification under the
Constitution; and hope to show that the
same rule, the same law, is just as obi
gatory upon this House with reference to
the rights Of delegate as the rights of
member. II I succeed in showing this, l
hope that my friesd from Michigan will
reconsider the declaration he has, hope,
too hastily made. I shall omit much
that had intended to say, because do
not desire to weary this House shall
only discuss what I consider the legal
points that are involved in the case.
Now, l wish to call the attention of the
House to the fact that since the formation
of this eovernment-at least since the
case Of James White in 1794-delegates
have been seated on this floor, and in the
language OF Msdi. ca in that case, under
the rules of the Constitution and the
laws, and as matter of absolute right.
James Madison, then g member of Con-
gress, and other distinguished nen who
had been 10 the convention that framed
the Constitution under which we now
live, all conceded, although there was
then 10 law of Congress providing for
the admission of a territorial delegate,
that Mr.. White had right on this floor
SIS much IS any member, under the Or
diDance of 1887, passed prior to
the adoption Of our present Consti
tuition, snd obligatory at that time upon
the government by adoption. From
that time to the present moment, when
ever q delegate has presented himself at
the bar of this House, there has never
been question about his right to seat
here under the law and under the Consti-
tuition as much ss a member. The books
before me are full Of cases recognizing
the absolute right of a delegate to seat.
l will not refer 10 these numerous cases
which SO fully recognize the right of a
delegate to his seat upon this floor. These
cases aud presidents are predicsted upon
the great fact of right, the absolute right,
Of delegate under the law to a sest.
Under the present law relating to dele |
gates from the territories it is provided |
that the people Of the territories shall send |
delegates who shall have seats on this /
floor with the right to debate but not the /
right to vote. This law was passed by /
this House and tho Senate and signed by
the executive. 1t is absolute in its opera
ton. It confers q right which this
House alone cannot curtAIl or limit in
any way whatever, as think [ shall be
able to show.
Allow me to say further in this CO.
nection that under the operation of the
law it Is provided in various statutes f
The federal government that delegst
shall be treated precisely the same as
mem bers in reference 10 every right ex-
oept that OF voting. It gives them The
same salary. They take the same oath.
The same law applies to both in reference
to vacancies. So on through the cats-
logue of the rights Of members. The law
hat gives a mem Der the right to be seated
here applies equally to delegate from
aterritory.
There is another proposition wish to
call TO the attention of the House, and l
ask the consideration of the distinguished
chairman of the committee on elections,
he gentleman from Indians, (Mr. CAL
kins, 10 this point when he comes to the
reply in the closing hour. It is this:
Congress mas passed law by which the
Constitution and the laws of the United
States so far as they sre applicable shall
apply to the territories. That law binds
IS much as any statute made by Congress
lnder the Constitution. It has never
been challenged till now, and has been
and praeticed upon, sud
as to qualifications for dele
gates for more than twenty-five years.
1t is important to be remem bered in this
connection that the Constitution is
applicable to the territories so far as it
IAN be applied, because as think i'm
1ortSnt consequences follow from that
'sct.
Now l wish to call the attention of the
House for moment to the proposition
which has been made by the majority
IF the committee in their report in this
case 10 the House. I think they have
,otally misstated, as they have totally |
the law. I can do it IN very |
few words. The ground is boldly taken |
By the majority Of the committee that
Congress connot make q law binding |
upon the Lext House as to the quslifcs-
lions Of delegates from territories. / will |
refer to page Of the report Of my dis
5inRuished friend from Indiana Mr..
Calkins] for the purpose of criticising il |
and to give him a chance to make an ex-
PLANTATION of it when he comes to reply.
The following are the exact words OF
The report:
HE holds that it is incompetent for
Congress and the executive to impose on
any future house the right of delegates
10 seats with defined qualifications. That /