Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1898-12-15
WuEELER AND HALEY.

w ~
The Hon. Joseph Bailey, of Texas, is
subjectins himself TO some criticism be-
cause he has avowed the purpose of chal-
longing the right of General Wheeler TO
exercise the duties OF a representative in
Congress- So far this session the General
has refrained from participating in the
proceedings of the House, but should he
give Mr.. Bailey an opportunity to do so
1t Is understood that that gentleman viii
challenge his right to be a general and a
representative at the same Time.
We cannot believe for a moment that
Mr. Bailey has anything but admiration
ana good wishes for the General. The
mes,l,a that is disturbing MI. Bailey is
une Of .aw simply. and it seems that he
prefers to make the test case in the per-
son of an illustrious man rather than in
that OF an obscure one.
Were MIR. Bailey to raise the question
In the case of a Republican he might be
charged with partisan motives. And in
esmuch as Mr. Bailey seems to be actu-
ated by none but the pu-est motives that
ran actuate a man ana representative, We
ran see no excuse for criticis,ng him.
The section Of the Federal Constitution
which Mr.. Bailey wishes interpreted by
the House is as follows:
Paragraph ?, Section 9, Article l., Consti-
tuuonD
No senator or representative shall du-
ring the time for which ne was elected,
be appointed TO any civil Office under tho
authority Of the United states, which
shan have been created, or the emolu-
ments whereof shall have been increased
during such time; and no person holding
any Office under the United States snail
be a member of either house during his
continuance in office.
Observe-"No person holding any Office
under the United States shall be mem
Der of either house during his continu-
Gnce in office"
1t would seem that General Wheeler and
all others like situated are amenable TO
The provisions of this section. Nor does
IL help the case that General Wheeler
draws only the salary of a majOr-general
and not that of a congressman The salary
question is not the great question. The
prime question is: is the General violating
G. constitutional provision? IL he Is he
ought TO be informed of that fact. All
that Mr.. Bailey proposes to do is to test
the matter, and he purposes making the
test in the case Of a great man instead of
I'm the case Of an obscure man. is there
anything wrong in that? IL so, we cannot
see it, Yet Mr.. Bailey is having leveled
at him the ridicule Of the Washington
Post.
Under the Administrators plans for the
Reorganization Of the army and navy the
President H. likely to have the appoint
ment Of nearly two thousand officers, ana
It is very important Tor the country 10
understand If the President is going to be
allowed 10 commission men who may
serve In tho army and Congress. too
This Is State question OF great i'm
portance. and though we would be the
last 10 DO anything 20 wound
the feelings of General Wheeler. we think
the question ought TO be settled
II under the Constitution he has the
right TO hold both positions, well and good !,
otherwise he ought to be called upon to
make his choice between the two. In case
OF a decision in his favor he would DO
well TO draw his salary as a congressman
and turn It into the Treasury. AS it is
we guess that that salary is going 10 his
credit every month, ana II so IN case of
his death II might be claimed by his
heirs or distributes.
There is a somewhat analogous question
up IN the Senate. The President has been
IN the habit OF appointing senators upon
various commissions authorized by law.
Three of the Peace Commissioners were
United States senators. II IS contended
by some that u is lawful Tor them TO
serve IN such positions. because they draw
no other pay than that OF senators. rrue,