The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1882-06-01

4 bOA upOSo upon theIn the duty OF taKtni
the oath as other mem bers of Congres
did; aid Mr.. White was seated withOu
Bal required to take it..
30 the position that because by law th
OonstitutiOn and laws Of the United
States were extended over the territories
and the reasons being the same ths rul
ought TO De the same, in my humbi
Judgment fails. The reasons are cot tn,
same. Be!ld the law expressly says ths
the Constitution and laws SD IL be ex
tended over the territories only in case
where other provisions are app icable,
and We all knOS what that was intended
TO do. Il did not refer By any manner
OF means to the right Of people of 6
t. rri.ory 10 elect delegate 10 Congress,
1t WAS Intended to bring them within the
purview Of the Constitution and laws OF
the country go as to provide them with
courts. protect the people in person and
property. orgsnizs them in bodies-politiC
and prep .re them for inEl admission IS
states into the Union.
1t is urged that the Constitution hay.
lag been construed, and the true con-
structiOu Of It being that members pos
sessing the three qualifications before al
luded to are entitled TO seats on this floor,
by parity Of reasoning it applies to the
| delegates as we'll, Who must first be- seated
before they can be excluded or expelled
for cause: not included in the constitu-
tionsl qualifications. The same reason
Why this proposition is not sound is the
one given by my answer to the other.
There is no res-On Why the House should
do so foolish thing as to seat delegate
for the purpose of expelling him the
mex: moment. II it can expel him by a
majority vote then, without = constitu-
tional Limitation upon it, as in the case
OF members from states, it can do the
same in the first instance by denying him
8 seat and delegate being without the
pale OF the Constitution. this House can
exclude him in the first instance by q
majority vote
come now to an argument which has
been urged by the gentleman from Ten
nessee Mr.. Hsuse] and the gentleman
from Illinois, IMr, Aoulton.I They say
that those who join in the majority re-
port will be "hoist By their own petard,"
for Congress has recently passed al anti
pOlygsmy law, and if cur position is
correct the next House Of Representa-
tives may seat polygsmist notwith-
standing the law. Now beg the gen.
tleman to look at the law. 1t does not
pretend to fetter this House. 1t is q lima
itation upoa the people Of the territory
who are debarred from the right of send
ing such man here to represent them.
Mr.. SprIDger-Suppose they do.
Mr.. Calkins-Suppose they do. Then
my judgment is thSt the rule laid down
in The l4w would be . wholesome rule
for Congress to adopt, as we are about TO
adopt it now.
In further ans yer must be permitted
to say: we have on the ststute-book q
lay which preaeribes the manner in
which contestants and contestees shall
proceed TO take testimony in contested
election cases, The law was passed by
the House and the Senate and approved
by the President. Yet there has never
been HOUSE since that law was passed
that has not violated it almost every time
it has tried a contested election case.
And why? Because it has been truly
said that Congress cannot pass law linn
iting the right of each House to judge of
the election, qualification, and return of
its members. And Justice Strong, who
was the author of that law, admitted
upon the floor when it was passed that It
did not bind any Congress but the one
which passed it, that it was wholesome
rule and should be followed, but that it
did not have the effect of positive law,
and was only binding When Congress
chose to follow it. McCrAry in his VAlu-
able work on elections takes the IS me
view.
Mr.. Sprirger-Do I understand my
honorable friend to Ssy that no matter
what qualifications Congress may by law
prescribe for delegate, 3 subsequent
House may disregard those qualifications
and sduit any delegate that the major
ity of that body may see fit to admit?
Mr.. CAlkins-I am coming to that in
q moment. The next proposition urged
is that Congress, having the constitu-
tional authority under that clause of the
Constitution which has been so often
quoted giving to Congress the power to
dispose Of and make all needful rules and
regulations respecting the territories of
the United Statss-thst Congress under
that clause has the power to provide for
q seat for 8 delegate on this floor, and,
having provided for it, it necessarily fol-
lows that this body is bound to receive
the delegate Rhom the people have
chosen. Now, does that follow?
To provide the right to a seat for DEL
egste is oAe thing; to provide who may
fill that seat is another thing. If that
position is correct, then when Congress
under that constitutional power hiss pro-
vided the seat, this body is stripped of
all right to examine ct all as to the qusli-
fcations Of the person to I'll it. And as
my friead from Illinois Mr.. Moulton1
argued, as understood him, you must
let the man who comes here, though he
BE- q Comauche Indian, fill that seat.
For if Congress has the constitutional
power to provide the seat and there is no
law, as there coniessedly is none, fixing
the qualifications Of delegates, and if this
body has not the right 70 judge Of the
qualifications of its own mem ers when
unfettered by constitutional restrictions,
then as logical sequence you must seat |
any man the people Of territory may
send here, no matter who or what he |
may be and regardless Of ell qusli6ca-
tons.
Again this position proves too much, |
and We cannot stand upon it. The true
doctrine is that this House is RENTED to
hat power under the constitutional
clause respecting the qualifications of Rem
oers,' or under the power Of general par
Iamentsry law, which gives to every
legislative body the right to pass upon
ne qualifications of its members. Upon
ms doctrine We can all safely stand, and
submit it is the only safe one.
Mr.. Springer-Do l understand the
gentleman to hold that after Congress