Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1899-12-22
WE MEET THE ISSUES.


eret News has fully explained, relates
10 something Of vastly more Import
ance than its effects upon the Con-
gresham from Utah. II has a bearing
upon the whole country. II is far
reaching and affects our national leg
islative system II member-elect
happens to be the victim Of some popu-
lar within, sufficient to agitate the aver
age Congressman, he can. on the pre-
cedent now afforded, be confronted
with an objection from some political
opponent and made to stand aside
until committee Of his enemies have
sat upon his case and reported their
findings This is not only new In con-
gressional proceedings, 1t is revolu.
tionary.
Few, II any, papers Of influence In the
country now take the ground that this
procedure is right or necessary. They
concede that the proper course was to
give the member from Utah the seat to
which he was entitled. and. then II the
charges against him We're Of sufficient
Importance, to refer the whole matter
to committee composed of members
taking opposite sides of the question.
But the Salt Lake morning paper
which helped TO raise the storm that
carried Congress OF its feet, stands al
most alone in defending ths action that
was taken. and arguing for its perma-
nent adoption as a parliamentary rule.
We have fully met every attempt at
reasoning in this direction which It
has put forth, but it now returns to its
shattered theory utterly ignoring the
fact that It has been knocked TO pieces.
II says
The News has not yet attempted 10
answer Representative Tc5ler's argu-
ment which had three rain points. ID
That the qualifications for a Congress
man, as noted In the Constitution, did
not prohibit Congress from adding
other needed essentials II II pleased to:
t2) that Congress had several prece-
dents for refusing duly elected mem
Der a place, until his status was in
CURED into, and CD that with Mr. Rob-
erts once sworn in and seated. there
was no power in the House TO eXpel
him Neither the News nor any other
Journal that thinks a mistake was
made. has, so far as We have seen, at
tempted TO review that argument"
One OF the troubles Of our contempt
rary is that It has a powerful forget
ter. The Deseret News has repeatedly
met the so-called argument" of Mr..
Tayler. On Dec. 18th, the News said:
1T is not disputed that Congress has
the power to prescribe certain qualih-
cations for its members other than
those already required. But is anybody
insane enough 10 claim that when a
member, duly elected and possessing all
the qualifications already established
by law presents himself TO take the
oath OF Office, new qualifications can
DC sprung upon him 10 satisfy the ella
NOR OF the multitude. and having no
legal force? While IL may be perfectly
Legitimate for the House Of Representa-
uyes TO duly enact new provisions In
reference to membership in that body. |
such new regulations cannot be adopt- |
ed except In proper legislative form and |
procedure, and cannot be made retro
active. And no such added quallfica-
lions have yet been prescribed"
On December 18th the News re- |
Suppose II is conceded that Congress
mas iull power 20 decide what oualif- |
cations IN addition to those named in |
the Constitution, 1t may deem neces- |
sary TO It's own dignity and the COM
mon welfare. VIII II be claimed by |
any sane, person that such qualflca-
lions can be required before they have
peen passed upon In the form OF law
body? ~ '"''
In the case under consideration M
sueh ADDITIONAL qualifications had been
enacted, or adopted, or even proposed.
neuoer-elect possessing all the
SPECIFICATIONS required OF other mem
Ders, was prevented from taking the
anne oath az was administered TO them.
oy an objection from one who had been
sworn IN and that objection did not
,slate 70 the absence OF any quallhca-
Ilon required by law, or rule or regu-
Iation in existence"
In the very article which the Tribune
attempts TO answer and pervert. on De.
,ember 2lst the News" argued:
Congress is restricted and governed
by the Supreme Law Of the land. II
las no power that Is not constitutional
y rs endowed with the right 10 Judge
d the qualifications Of lis members
Dut ulose qualifications are defined
stner DIV the Constitution itself or by
avs that nave been enacted In pursu- I
thce thert~ The House OF Representa-
ives has no right TO require a new
qualification as 20 membership until II
mas been duly enacted"
These replies which cover the ground
d Mr. Taylers point No. 1. have not
been noticed by our contemporary in Ms
ehdeaYors to bolster up the Ohio mem.
oers bag Of wind, but there is no need
of our repeating them.
IN reference to No. 2, the News has
shown that the so-called "precedentsr
cited by Mr. Tayler were not relevant
% me case In question. The persons oS.
'eeied TO- IN those instances. it was
clalmee We're without qualification
winch had been made requisite to sea,
~ me House % Representatives. No
"uch qualification had been adopted or
required as that which Mr.. Tayler
sprung upon Mr.. Roberts, and II has
MOI ye' become requirement Of law
OF settled regulation.
!" 70 We third point, there is moth
ing IN II except cause for laughter ana
.on,.a On Mr. Tayler's mode OF rea-
1''e member-elect must be pre-.