Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1899-12-15
NEITHER "sASE" NOR SAFE

The New York Mail and Express, in
opposition to the views Of the Now
York Times on the power OF exclusion
vested In Congress. quotes the words
of DR.. Lyman Abbott. whom II lauds
as "a distinguished clergyman and a
cogent reasoner." and says:
'Dr. Abbotrs contention. which sup
ports our own as heretofore expressed,
Is this: The intent OF the Constitution
IS that no man shall be admitted un-
less he possesses the qualifications
which Il enumerates. Aside from this
limitation which the fathers deemed
fundamentally essential, II leaves either
house " Congress free to exclude for
the absence Of any other qualifications
the possession OF which II may deem
necessary to rs own dignity and the
common welfare. In other words, the
Constitution does not intend TO coniine
Congress 10 consideration Of the quail
fications for admission get down, but ~
make OF those sine qua non for
member-elcct.
This Is the sane and the safe view
the view taken by the House, without
regard to party"
That may be the sane and the safe
View Of this question, but Is It either
safe or sane to assume that when no
other qualifications than those required
by the Constitution exist in form Of law
either house Of Congress can impose
new qualification. simply on the OBJ
lection OF member against another,
based solely on popular sentiment
Suppose it is conceded that Congress
has full power to decide what qualih-
cations, In addition TO those named In
the Constitution. 1T may deem neces-
sary to It's own dignity and the com
mon welfare" Will It be claimed by
any sane person that such quallhca-
tions can be required. before they have
been passed upon In the form Of law
or rule properly adopted by that
body?
In the case under consideration, no
such ado ional qualifications had been
enacted, or adopted. or even proposed.
4 member. elect possessing all the
qualifications required Of other mem-
bers. was prevented from taking the
same oath as was administered to them,
by an objection from one who had been
sworn In, and that objection did not
relate TO the absence Of any quallhca-
ton required by law, or rule, or regu-
lailon IN existence.
IL this can be made offectual in the
present instance, what is there 60 hin
der It's being carried out against other
members, who may be the subjects Of
popular aversion aroused by their re-
l'gious or political enemies? Where Is
the safety" or the sanity" Of such a
proceeding? A law or rule or re-
Qulremcnt Of any kind, to be legal mus,
have been passed upon and adopted
before II could be required Of any per-
son. IT does not take any great famil-
arity with constitutional law or the
rules Of legislative body 70 see this
simple point. II only needs little
common sense.
We are asked whether II Mr. Roberts.
when he presented his credentials. had
been afflicted With smallpox or bubonlc
plague. the House would have been
bound 10 receive him. We answer most
certainly. He would be entitled to his
seat although Il might have been found
necessary 10 submit his case 10 mcdl-
cal examination ana attention before
allowing him to mlngle with his fellow
members, II he We're insane enough 10
attempt to do so, knowing his own con-
dltlon. But his right TO the seat 10
which he had been duly elected. could
not be disputed on the ground OF his
III health, for that Is not disduall-
fication 10 the Office OF q Representative
in Con ress a member may be ad.
judged as fully entitled 10 a seat In
Congress. although conditions may bt
such that he must not Tor the time be.
ing occupy that seat. There Is no par,
allcl between such a case ana that IN,
der consideration.
The same sage authority that asked
the silly question which we hay,
stopped TO answer announces it's BELLE
that any position which uine.tenths OF
men Of all parties decides s right ouph
not TO be questioned" We ara thank
ful to say that We DO not coincide VIII
this view. II is neither "sanc" MOI
safe" We Join with the leading light
Of the country, legal journalistic an,
judicial, In the fm conviction OK
pressed by many OF the Conrresymel
themselves, that IN excluding the mem
ber from Utah who possessed ever,
qualification required by existing law
great mistake was made. and that
was occasioned by shameful panderln
10 popular outburst aroused by re
llgous fanatics and political consplra
tors. There IS 90 valid excuse for m
outrage which has been perpetrate
upon the excluded member and una