Delaware gazette and state journal., 1896-04-02
From our Washington Correspondent.

s from Our washington correspondent
Washington, April III challenge
contradiction here and now, emphati-
cally asserted Senator George of Mia.
sisAippi, on several occasions during
the course of his argument against the
seating OF Col. III. A. du Pont, in the
Senate yesterday. The Senator'S argu.
mont was clear and logical. lIe prg.
sented the contentious of tho minority
in little different form from what has
already been said on the subject, and
clearly demonstrated that Acting Gov
ernor Watson had right to vote in tho
joint assembly. Tho Senator spoke for
three hours and half; but owing to
the many Interruptions, which he ut
times invited, was unable to conclude
his speech.
There was quito large attendance
in the Senate chamber during the
course OF the Senator's remarks All
of the Republican members of tho com
mittee on privileges and electiona oc-
cupied seats near the speaker, and
Senators Mitchell, Burrows and lloar
frequently interrupted to ask questions.
Mr.. Brown of Utah took notes with the
evident intention of replying to tho ar
gument. Senator Butler, Populist, of
North Carolina, was also an attentive
listener.
Senator George had evidently givon
the question much serious Gunsidera-
tion, and was ready at all times to an
swer the questions of the Republican
Senators His argument was devoid of
technical phrases and 'supposed
cases. " Ho confined himself to the
facts as they exist, saying that the
great trouble with the argument OF the
majority was that an effort was made
to frame constitution rather than
construe the meaning of the one that
existed. Senator Gray occupied d
chair directly in front of the Senator
from Mississippi, and lost no opportun-
ity 10 emprasiZe the many conclusive
arguments advanced. Senator Mitchell
presented several of his fanciful cases,
and 1t was during discussion of one
Of his hypothetical questions that Sem
ator Gray drew forth an admission from
Senator Hoar decidedly against the
claimant.
The question of the Senator from
Oregon was, in brief, that al member
of the Legislature was liable TO be ar
rested and brought into the Senate,
could the aorgeant-at-arms go to the
gubernatorial Office and arrest tho acting
Governor, as the Speaker of the Senate
was designated, and bring him into
the Senate while he was performing
the Office of Governor? Mr.. George
promptly replied that the acting Gov
ernor was still a Senator and was neces-
sarily under the rules and regulations
Of the Senate Mr.. Mitchell then
called Intention to the fact that as
Speak5 of the Senate occupying tho
Office I I Governor, he was commander
inc chief of the militia, and he wanted
to know il tho Senator from Missis-
sippi held that the sergeant alarms of
the Senate could arrest the Speaker IL
ho was at the time in command OF the
State troops Senator Gray at this point
took hand in tho controversy and an
swered Mr.. Mitchell by asking ques-
tion similar to tho one propounded, eX-
.cept that he referred to tho time before
the passage of the act of 1886, changing
the Presidential succession, when the
president pro tempore of the Senate
was the person upon whom the Prhsi-
dental office would devolve in tho CAGE
of the death of both the President and
Vice. President of the United States.
Mr.. Gray said that it was admitted by
all that the President pro temporo
would still remain Senator, and asked
Mr.. Mitchell If the sergeant-a t-arms
of the Senate could arrest the President
of the Senate while he was in command
of the army and naval forces of the
United States. Mr.. Mitchell did not
answer; but Mr.. Hoar, after admitting
the truth of the Senator's statement,
said "we changed the law" Senator
Gray quickly replied, "That is just it.
They have not changed tho law in
Delaware.
Senator George, in opening his argu-
ment, said that great stress ana reliance
had been placed by the advocates of
the claimant upon alleged common law
rules as to the incompatibility OF two
offices, and upon certain supposed prin
ciplos OF the American system that ex-
ecutive and legislative offices are in
compatible. He said their validity,
force and Importance had been greatly
magniiied. In tho provisions Of tho
Constitution of Delaware, he said, no
force is given to the common law rule.
Provisions are made denying the stimuli
taneous occupancy of two Offices which
have no reference to their incompati-
bility. And careful examination Of
the Constitution would show that there
was an utter disregard of the so called
great fundamental principal said to
arise out of the American system. Ho
asserted that thore is no ineompati-
bility of office in common law by the
exercise of legislative and executive
offices, and that there was more in favor
OF the blending of the functions of the
two offices in tho common law practice
than against it. In support of this
position he cited tho fact that under
the common law the King of Great Bri-
tain is part of the legislature of that
country. He read extracts from au-
thorities sustaining his argument. Tho
American rule, he said, has no refer
ence TO the holding of offices; ir ia a
question of a division of power, the
rule being that persons holding the
powers of ono department shall not OK
ercise tho powers of another department
of the government, Tho violation Of
the American principle does not have
the effect of tho common law. In com
mon law, when man holds an Office
and accepts second one incompatible
with the first, he vacates tho first
No such consequences have ever boon
applied or can be applied to this rule
growing out of the American system.
lie quoted from decisions of the supreme
court of New York, where il was held
that at common law there was no inconi-
uatibility between a Legislative and OK.
utive Office
We are hero constituting constitu-
tion, not making one, !" he said. "Ii
we were here framing the constitution
IT might be well to insert that the
Legislative, executive and judicial
branches OF the government should be
kept apart, but when we come to con.
L.. .A.-A