The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1882-05-27
THE DEBATE.
Cont nuatiOn of the Cam -.
Campbell Contest in
House.
MOuItON's Argument.
Continued from Fridays Daily.

The minority said:
! III Is admitted 10 the report, and th,
fact has not been and is not denied. tina
Dir. Cannon possesses the constitutions
| quailncatlons unless the qualifications O
delegate in Congress from a territory
| oiH9r from the qualifications fixed by The
Constitution for member of the House
mere can be no sufficient reason assigned
ior the position that the qualifications are
| any different. The line OF de.
NARRATION between these two prea
powers of the House, the power tn judge
OF the elections. returns and qualification:
OF lis own members by q mere majority
vote, and the power 10 expel its mem
bers bV twO-lhirds vote, is clear and
we'll defined"
The 'vie1s' Of the minority on the
point were further expressed in these
words:
But graVer question than those we
have considered Is The question whether
the House ought, as a matter of policy or
to establish precedent, to expel either a
delegate or mem Der on account OF alleged
crimes or immoral practices, unconnected
with their duties or obligations as mem
bers or delegates, when the member or
delegate possesses all the qualifications to
entitle him to his seat.
''If we are to 60 into the question of
the moral fitness Of a mem Der to occupy
seat in the House, where will the in
curry stop? What standard shall we fix
IN determining what is and What is not
sufficient cause for expulsion? If mum
Der Of mem 5ers engage in the practice Of
gaming for money or other valuable
thing, or are accused Of violating the
marital VOW by intimate association with
four women, three of whom are not law
full wives, or are charged with any other
ofense, and majority Of the House, or
even two-thirds, expel them, it may be
the recognition of dangerous power and
policy. If exercised and adopted by one
political party 10 accomplish partisan
ends, 1t furnishes a precedent which it
will be insisted justifes similar action by
the opposite party whea they have a
majority or a two-thirds msjority in the
House; and thus the people are deprived
of representation, and their representa-
tives, possessing the necessary quslifca-
tiona, are expelled for causes outside of
the constitutional qualifications of mem
bers, or those which delegate must pos
sess, so far as his qualifications are fixed
by reason or analogy, or are drawn from
the principles of our representative sys-
tenn Of government"
It may be stated that the reports, both
of the majority and minority, were made
by republicans.
That is q precedent that covers the case
before the House in every particular. 1t
WAS exhsustively discussed in the com
mittee and in the House, and was ad-
opted by the House by an overwhelming
majority, aud it stands to-day IS the rule
end law Of the House, unless it shall be
reversed.
The issue in that case was sharply
made, and the rule established that dele
gates from territories are entitled TO the
benefit of the constitutional limitations as
to qualifications, and that polygamy was
not disqualification.
Nov, If the rule that has been estab-
lished and prseticed since the formation
of the government as to qualification for
members and delegates to the House is to
be reversed ard different rule adopt. d,
what standard shall it be?
This House may exclude q member OF
charge Of polygamy. The next House
may exclude person elected because be
is hereto or Catholic or q Methodist,
or because he has been charged by his
opponent with adultery or some other Of
tense.
We Lave associated with him for SIX,
eight, or ten years upon terms of EQUAL
ity, and L am glad to see nv honorable
friend, the gentleman from Indiana, in
his report says that he is a gentleman,
and that he makes no aspersions upon his
personal character or honor. A legisls-
tive body like this, where the members
are elected by the people, who are the
sovereign Ia this country, should not set
up any transcendental standard f neral
qualifications to enlitle one TO a seat. If
high moral standard was a prerequisite
to seat here, but few might fad admis-
sion. The people elect men to Office for
their supposed fitness and ability to take
care of the peoples interests. The ques-
ton of immsculative virtue is not so
much considered. l think the law and
the evidence is with Mr.. Cannon and
that be is entitled to his seat. It is for
this House sitting as judges in this case
to say on their oaths whether Mr. Can
non shsll be seated here as a delegate
from tie Territory Of Utah, or whether
he shall be excluded, sDd precedents, the
Constitution, and the laws shall be vio-
lated, and the people Of Utah deprived
of representation.
Mr.. Calkins-Mr. Speaker. before de-
manding the previous question it is due
that should say TO the House that Mr..
Cannon has personally asked me for
an hour in his own behalf. I make this
for the reason that only q few
minutes ago Mr.. Cannon notified me
that he would like to have an hour.
cannot see why it should be granted, as
four hours have already been given to
that side of the question for discussion by
consent. Still. as a matter of
Justice o him, feel bound to submit the
fact to the House.
Mr.. Spsrks-I can see very well why
it should be granted. Here is the very
very gentleman himself who is to be af-
fected by the action here, and it,would
only seem to be q matter OF right to al
low him an opportunity Of being heard.
Mr.. CalkiBs-Gentlemen will bear me
witness thst l have not objected to the
extension of any time Of any gentleman
who has taken the floor upon this ques-
ton. but supposed that the hour asked
BY the gentleman from Utah would have
been taken ont of the time allowed
for debate upon The other side o! this
question.
Mr.. Randall would like to ask the
gentleman from Indiana if there has ever
besn q case where an application Of this
sort has been refused?