Evening star., 1898-12-31
Not Olear How He Can Be Kept From
Taking His Seat.
USUAL METHOD OF PROCEDURE
The House Cannot Act Upon Mere
Report
L w 0 WAYS ARE OPEN

4 Roberts ~
| Utah is going 10 be prevented from taking
| his seat in the House at the opening Of the
fffty-sixth Congress. While the sensibili-
| ties of the people may be shocked and
| popular protest excited by the proposition
| that polySamous Mormon is TO be ad-
| mtteo TO a seat in the United States Com
gress, 1t is not clear whether, under tho
| practices of Congress. Mr.. Roberts can he
| denied his seat, however numerous the
| protests, and however distastetul to tho
moral ideas of the community The sub
| Ject is still open 70 consideration but tb,
| prevailing opinion among congressional
| authorities is that the mere common re-
| port that Mr.. Roberts has more than one
Wie would not establish a disqualification
| for membership In the House
| The House can act only upon official eyi-
dence in the matter of admitting members
| to the oath of office. The certificate of
election. made out in proper form, is the
| evidence which is recognized. This evi-
| dence may be called into dispute by another
| candidate claiming the election on the
grounds that the certificate is based on
| improper returns. or IL might be contested
on the grounds that the man certified is
not quailned for membership. In any
| event. If the certificate of election is regIt-
| lar. the oath of office is administered to
| the man certified, and he is permitted to
| IL decided
| House, on evidence submitted TO its COM
| mittee, that he not entitled to the seat
| from any cause whatever.
l Inc House might at any time, arbitrarily,
| by a majority vote, unseat a man, but il
| would be considered unJustifable and revo-
| iutionary to do so, except upon evidence of
| disqualification.
The Regular Course,
III frequently happens that a party in
control of the House increases its majority
I by deciding contests in favor of contest
| ants of its own faith oustfng the contestee
| of the opposing party. when the contest is
| based upon a very fiimsy pretext but such
action Is always based on a claim that
| the evidence JuStifes il. and the procedure
| IN the case is conducted according TO fixed
| methods. It has been decided also. where
| contests have been instituted, that neither
| party was entitled to the certificate Of cleo
| ton, and that. therefore, the seat was
vacant and would have to be filed by an
| other election. In all such cases the con-
| test is made by the rival candidate. claim
| ing a right to the certificate given to the
| other.
! In these cases the evidence is collected by
| the parties TO the contest. the notice of
contest having been filed with the clerk OF
| the House within the prescribed limit u
! time, and the committee Of elections iisters
| to arguments and considers in judicial ca
| pacity the evidence submitted. These con-
| tests, which occur with every Congress are
| based upon rival claims to the seat
| Inc House has never thought Il eXpc-
| dent to investigate a mans moral char
| acter in order TO determine his eligibility
| to a seat in Congress. Such a practice
would possibly have serious CONSEQUENCES
with respect to the membership. and might
necessitate a reduction in the number nee
| essary to constitute quorum for business.
Objection to Roberts
The grounds upon which Mr. Roberts
| right to a seat in the House might be CON
| tested would have TO be. not that he prac-
| ticed immortality, but that he was guilty Of
| a statutory crime. which would dsqualify
| him for membership in Congress Convic-
| tion Of the crime charged by some court
| having jurisdiction. it is held. would be
essential as a basis for action by the House
/ to adjUdge him disqualified. The charge is
made that Roberts convicted in lSS,.
| before the state was organized If this
charge should be sustained II would per
| haps be within the province of the House
to declare that the conviction Of this
crime disqualified him for membership IN
Congress-, and that. therefore the seat was
vacant If lie claimed a seat in Congress
as delegate from territory. the offense
charged against him would be a violation
of a federal law. and the matter could be
more easily got at; but il is held that Con-
gress cannot enforce the laws OF a state.
nor can the House put one of it's members
on trial before the bar of the House for
Violation of state law.
The indictment and trial must, IL is held.
be by the state authorities, and then the
conviction can be made ground upon which
his right to a seat in the House might be
denied. The Edmunds law no longer ap-
Plies TO Utah since it has become a state.
The and-polygamy laws now in force there
are such are made by the state and
those accused of violating the law are sub
ject to trial under the jurisdiction OF the
state.
Two Ways of Proceedings.
There appear to be but two ways by
which the case of Mr. Roberts can be
brought within the jurisdiction of the
House. One is by his being indicted and
convicted in Utah of polygamy. II is in
fact alleged in this connection that he en-
tered plea of guilty to the charge Of un-
lawful cohabitation April -. 1889. and was
sentenced to the Utah penitentiary for four
months. This, however, was when Utah
was territory and the Edmunds law APP
piled to il.
The other is through contest being filed
by any candidate who ran against him for
Congress claiming and proving that he is
not eligible to a seat in Congress. The
latter method would be open TO a question
on technical grounds, but technicalities
might be ignored by the House If the senti-
ment were very strong. A case made by a
contestant in this way might be sustained
by argument on analogy. assuming for eX-
ample. that If man who was not a citizen
of the United States We're given a certif-
cate of election to Congress the power
would have to rest with the House to de-
prive him of the privilege of occupying the
the state by which he was accredited to
Congress. But this analogy would not
be perfect since the disqualification in the
supposed case would be a constitutional
one, while in the Utah case il is not.
1t is apparent that the question is going
to bother the House great deal if pressed
upon its consideration
There is no cessation in the agitation of
the Roberts case by those favorable to his
rejection by the House. Petitions for his
unseatfng are being circulated in several
states and, according to reports are being
signed by both men and women OF high
standing in their respective communities.
Resolutions prepared by members Of the
Kansas legislature have been introduced in
the House and Senate expressing the dis
approval of the legislature of Roberts
being permitted to take his seat in Congress
and urging the members of Congress from
Kansas to use every honorable means
in their power to prevent him from tax
ing his seat
Baltimore Markets.