The representative. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1893-1901, 1895-05-08
"THAT LAW" AGAINST BANKERS.
A MISTAKE TO BE AVOIDED
Claim Nothing But What Can Be
Proved.
Editor NonconforJnist.

Editor Noncon fornist.
IN your issue OF the 14th inst. cor
respondent from Stafford, Kan, Mr..
l.. Z. Main, says: II have seen it
stated in some CT the reform papers
that during the administration Of
President Washington bill was sign
ed by him making bankers Ineligible
to a seat in Congress. I have seen the
statement denied. Was such law
passed."
Mr.lMain will find the legislation re-
ferred to in the proceedings Of the
third Congress, in the adoption in
that Congress, December %, 1893, of
the following:
'Eesolved, Any person holding
stock in any Institution Of the nature
Of d bank for issuing or discounting
bills Or notes payable to bearer or or
der cannot be member of the House
whilst he holds such Office or stock"
This resolution was signed by Presi-
dent George Washington. II ever re-
scnded or repealed I find no record
Of it. READER.
Nashville, Tenn.
Note by the Editor of the Noncon-
formist:-Our correspondent must
have made a very haSty and very in
accurate examination of this matter.
When Mr.. Mains letter was publish
ed, the editor appended a note saying
that he had not looked up the records,
but would pronounce off-hand the
! opinion that no such law was passed
as it would be in plain c0ntravention
of the constitution, which fixes the
qualifications for congressman and
these cannot be added to or detracted
from by any law of Congress. After
receiving the above letter we went to
the city library and investigated the
documents. Just as we expected, the
resolution was proposed amendment
to the constitution (the only way the
matter could be reached,) 1t was in
| troduced in the Senate on January IA,
1894, and consideration postponed I'M
til January 16. On that day the orig
inal resolution was amended by vote
of 10 to y, then the last clause of it
as amended was stricken out and the
entire resolution, as amended, was
voted on and defeated. Then consid-
GRAFTON of the whole subject was post
no record of it's having been consider
where our Nashville correspondent
gets his authority for saying that it
was adopted "by Congress, December
%, 1893" One branch of Congress
might adopt something on a particu-
lar day but Congress itself, which con-
sists of the Senate and House, can't
possibly pass any law at one time. It
must be by vote of the separate
| houses at different times. Our Nash
Vile correspondent is also clearly off
in saying that George Washington
| signed the resolution in question. In
| the first place. the president does not
sign joint resolutions. He only signs
laws. Had the resolution above re-
ferred to passed the Senate. it would
| have been sent to the House. If
| aGnnted there also it would have been
submitted to the states for ratitica-
ticn. II ratified by three-fourths OF
| TIE states it would have become a
| part Of the constitution of the United
| Sta tes and that is the only way in
which it could have been made effec-
| tive. In other words the only way
that bankers or anybody else can be
| excluded from Congress is by the con-
| stitution itself. No law or resolution
t,f Congress can accomplish that Oh
ject.