The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1890-12-30

at noon, and the vice president laid be-
fore the senate a communication from
the governor OF Idaho, transmitting the
credentials from the senators-elect from
that state, George L. Shoup and William
j. Mcconnell.
The credentials having been read, Hoar
asked that as Shoup was present the oath
Of office be administered TO him. Vance
remarked that the new state of Idaho
appeared 10 have elected more than its
share OF senators, and he thought the
credentials should be referred TO the COM
mittee 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 be-
came OF Vance's motion, and said
Shoup was simply sworn on his
prima facie case. Vance remarked
il was stated in the newspapers that three
senators were elected in Idaho and that
the legislature had gone TO the extent of
assigning each Of them term for which
he should serve. That was contrary, he
said, TO the rule of the senate and TO the
constitutional provision. He thought it
proper, therefore, that the question be
determined by the proper committee of
the senate.
Mitchell said that he had reliable infor-
nation that so far as the election of three
senators was concerned he held il was
regular and in order. Hoar argued the
question was a simple one. II was clear
and unquestionable that one Of the two
senators whose credentials had just been
presented would go out on the 4th Of
March, 1891, and the legislature, being in
session, had elected senator the term
which would then begin. Beyond all ques-
tion there would be a vacancy at that time
because one ofthose two gentlemen would
have to go out on the 4th Of March, 1891.
Carlisle argued that the legislature OF
Idaho had no right TO assume in advance
of the action by the senate that there
would be vacancy in the senate from
that state on March 4, 1891. No election
of senator TO fill such vacancy could
take place until il was legally known a
vacancy would occur. After II was de-
termined by the senate in constitutional
way that there would be a vacancy after
that time, the next legislature of Idaho il
in session, might proceed at once 10
choose a senator and II the legislature
were not in session the appointment OF a
senator should be made by the governor
Of the state. He imagined there had
never been case in the history Of the
country where a state legislature had
chosen three senators at once.
Hawley-Is il not imperative under the
constitution that there will be vacancy
after March 4 next?
Carlisle-I think so.
Hawley-Then how could the legisIa-
ture Of Idaho be any more certain Of that
fact three months hence than il is to-
day?
After a discussion between Carlisle,
Reagan. Spooner and others regarding
the legality of the election Of three sena-
tors by the Idaho legislature, the creden-
iials OF Shoup and Mcconnell were re.
ferred TO the committee on privileges.
Aldrlch offered resolution for the
amendment Of the rules. Of which he had
given notice, and he asked that II be
printed and laid over.
Cockrell asked whether il was now in
order to move 10 refer the resolution 10
the committee on rules.
Aldrich replied that the motion would
be in order when the resolution comes
up.
Stewart gave notice that tomorrow
morning he would move TO take up the
financial bill.
German moved TO take up the bill for
the adjustment Of the accounts Of labor.
ers. etc., under the eight.hour law. bu,
Hoar claimed the floor on thu elections
bill and German withdrew his motion.
Hoar yielded the floor 10 Hiscock, who
addressed the senate at length in support
OF the bill. Al the conclusion
of Hiscock's speech Roar addressed
the senate. In the course of his remarks
Hoar said the struggle for the pending
bill was a struggle Tor the last step toward
establishing the doctrine 10 which the
American people were pledged by their
history, their constitution, their opinions
and interests. They could not know in
their citizenship slaves, vassals or an in.
ferior race. IL wns idle 10 debate theories
or philosophers in the presence
Of the express provisions OF
the constitution. He replied with all
the Indignation which calumny deserved,
| the assertion that the bill was a partisan
measure, or that any man who supported
1t was actuaied 10y partisan purposes
| The bill was one 10 exclude partisanshir
| from the determination of title 10 a place
on the roll Of the house OF representa-
tyes, as absolutely as the lot OF humanity
would admit.
The committee then reported il hac