The Helena independent. [volume] (Helena, Mont.) 1875-1943, 1890-12-30
|DAH0'S THREE SENATORS
One Of Them is Sworn in and His
Case Afterward Dis
cussed.
Three Men With Exactly Similar
Claims to Two Seats In the
Senate.
Suppose Two Should be sworn in and tho
Third File His Credentials-The
Case Referred.

WARRINGTON, Dec. 29.-The senate met at
noon and the vice president laid before the
senate communication from the governor
of Idaho transmitting the credentials of the
senators-elect from that state, George L.
6houp and VIM. j. Mcconnell. Thei- Gre
dentials having been read, Hoar asked that
as Shoup was present the oath Of office be
administered him. Vance remarked that
the new state of Idaho appeared to have
elected more than its share Of senators and
he thought it should be referred to the
committee on privileges and elections.
Hoar's motion having been agreed to, that
senator escorted Shoup to the clerks desk
where he took the oath of Office. Harris
subsequently inquired what became of
Vance's motion and said Shoup was SIM
ply sworn in on his prima facie case.
Vance remarked that it was stated
in the newspapers that three senator's were
elected in Idaho and that the legislature
had gone to the extent of assigning each of
them tho term for which he should serve.
That was contrary, he said, to the rule Of
the senate and to the constitutional pro-
vision. He thought it proper therefore that
the question be determined by the proper
committee of the senate. Mitchell said
that he had reliable information 80 far as
the election of the three senators are con-
cerned ne held that it was regular and in
order. Hoar argued that the, question was
a very simple one. as it was slear and m
questioned that one of the two senators
whose credentials had just been presented
would 90 out on the 4th of March, 1891.
and the legislature .'being in session. had
elected the senator for the term which
would then begin. Beyond all question
there would be a vacancy at that time be-
cause one of those two gentlemen would
have to 20 out on the 4th Of March. 1891. 4
Carlisle argued that the Legislature OF
Idaho has no right to assume in advance
an action by the senate;'' that there would
be asvacancy in the senate from that state
on the 4th Of March, 1891, and that no, cleo
tion4o senator to ELL such vacancy could
take place until il was leeally known that
mined by the senate in constitutional
way that there would be i Vacancy after
that time, the next legislature Of Idaho, if
in session, might proceed at once to choose
senator, and if the legislature we're not in
session the appointment Of senstor should
he made by the governor of the state. He
imagined there had never been a case in
the history of the country where state leg
islature had chosen three senators at once
Hawley-sIs it not imperative under tho
constitution that there should DO a vacancy
after the 4th Of March next?''
Carlisle-"I think so.''
Hawley-''Then how could the legislature
Of Idaho be any more certain of that fact
three months hence than it is to-day?''
Carlisle-"Each one of these gentlemen
holds precisely the same form Of cretlen-
tials. Now, want the senator to state
what the senate would do in case all three
of them presented their credentials ut the
same time. How would the senate deter
mine what two of them were legal and
what one Of them was not.''
The discussion was continued by Stew
art, Sanders, Cockrell, Spooner, Reagan
and Mitchell. Vance's motion to refer the
cowmittee on privileges and elections was
then agreed to.