Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1893-04-05
THE CONTESTED ELECTION CASES.
Arguments for and Against the sitting SEM
stors Made To-day.

Arguments for and Against the sitting SEM
ators Made To-day.
There was such array Of vacant chairs on
both sides Of the Senate chamber when ves,er-
days journal read that the absence Of =
quorum WAS suggested by Mr.. Hoar ,Massl
The roll called and only thirtv-eicht
Senators responded. After little DELAY. how
ever. q quorum obtained. forty-:our Sem
ators being present, and business was pro-
ceeded with.
The report Of the committee on privilege.
and elections in favor of seating the three sem
ators iron Montana. Washing ton aud Wyoming
by appointment OF the governors ~ those
states was taken up and Mr. Chandler (N.H
member of the committee. made an argument
in support of the resolution.
He opened his speech with "Reminiscences of
John Z. Hale of New HAMPSHIRE. the iirst ana
slavery Senator (ls45), quoting some verses of
Whittier written IN honor Of that occasion.
and after reviewing the history of some QUEER
| Material appointments of Senators from that
state he said that he had been under the in-
cubls OF supporting that the governor had not
the power TO appoint senators IN cases where
the legislature had failed To elect but he had now
reached the conclusion that the governors had
! that right
The question was one simply between .
technical and narrow construction of the Con-
| sntution and broad and liberal construction
OF IL. The modern idea that rs the states
were entitled to lightweight senators they all
should be IN the Senate not only for the
| benefit OF their respective states but for The
| benefit Of the whole United States and that
| whenever there not senator elected
| by the legislature thee should be one ap-
pointed by the governor lie admitted that
| the power Of the legislature primary while
that OF the government was secondary: but n
| did not follow that the power Of the governor
IN the matter was any less complete than that
| OF the legislature. He expressed his surprise
| that the Senators from Oregon and Illinois
| (MItchell and Palmer should have taken the
position they did take on TINS question after
! their arguments last session to prove that if
there was any one thing that was vicious in the
present Constitution of the country It was tine
method of electing senators by state legisia-
| lures. Then they had been decrying the state
! legislatures: now they were eleyating them and
were advocating the right. and. rs Ear a. p.ssi-
bic. the exclusive righs, of state legislatures 10
elect United States senators. He could not
follow them in either Of their projects.
SENATOR PALMER N OPPOSITION.
Mr.. Palmer Qn), another member Of tho
committee on privileges ami elections. argued
against the majority report. ard replied TO
| some OF Mr.. Chambers propositions lie re-
called the impressive reading by senator Man
! dersonl Of Washington farewell adires on
the I'D OF February last. and referred TO that
part OF 1t which reminded the pco-
| pie that the Constitution could lie
! amended aud thus altered. and which warned
them against constructive alteration of that
! instrument De impressed with those
| words of the father OF his country. IN view OF
| what had been said today nv tn. Senator ftom
! New Hampshire That Senator adm tied that For
many wears after the formation OF the Causti u
lion the construction for which he Mr.. Hailne,D
contended was the received construction hat
the Senator from New Hamnshire had dIscus-
cred that the Constitution might be charged
by construction. The fathers" bad adopted
what the senator called q narrow and nil5eral
| construction of the Constitution: but he-their
| wiser son-had found another ethod better
than theirs. The senator discovery reminded
him of a CalyInistic preacher, who. On a GER
| tain occasion, said TO his congregation:
MY brethren, there Is man going up and
down through the country teaching that all
men ne saved. Thank God. We teach
better things" Laughter That was an
| illustration OF the Senator's method Illiber-
atty characterized the authors OF the COnsti-
tuition and their contemporaries. LibertlIty dis
t;nguished the Senator from New Hanp-
| shire and those who thought with
him. For himself (Mr. ralmer) he
preferred TO be reputed as iliberal with those
| who won the Independence OF the country and
VINO framed its admirable system of govern
ment, rather than to follow the new hight
preached bv the distinguished senator from
New Hampshire. He had been referred TO BY
the Senator as desiring to alter the Constitution
in order to give the election OF Senators
to the people of the United States. He did
so desire. But he desired to have the Consti-
tuition altered by formal provision; TO have it
| changed deliberately and solemnly. No incon-
| sistency could be predicated or charged.
because while the Constitution existed hs
favored adhering TO it rigidly. AID il would
| be found that the most dangerous class Of
| politicians in the country were those who
| believed and taught that the framework of
government (the Constitution) was to be modi-
4 fed. not by formal action am one OF the methods
prescribed by the Constitution. but was to be
/ altered by construction 30 as TO meet changed
conditions. real or imaginary. He (sIr. rai-
| mer) asked TO stand by the Constitution rs It
| is. He had no right to be liberal in constituting
an instrument which he had sworn to support
Neither his Judgment nor his conscience would
| allow him to follow the Senator from New
Hampshire in the path which he had marked
| out for the Senate to pursue.
Mr.. Palmer went TO argue the question in
detail against the right of governors 10 APP
point Senators under the circumstances exist