Custer weekly chronicle. [volume] (Custer City, S.D.) 1890-1931, 1900-01-27

Majority EsAsors outrisls Exprlaic


Majority AAxors ontriglt ExpnAsi Sion
of E,otV ainOua VA lfanher
WsGhinefen ian. The sepofta
il the ccran Zee of investigated in
ths case of Serts. of Utah, were pre-
sented to tho house today. The MAJ
orisy report signed by Chairman Tas-
er and SIX of ilis associayeR, is veltl-
ninous document, accotapanied by p
SuInmary 0f the law and the facts II
lives details al the hearin9s, The ans
bic opportunities afforded Roberts 10
present hia case, his refusal 70 testi'
fg and tile nnabimous finding by fine
COMMITTEES. heretofore published, that
roberts Is guilty Of living ia polygii-
NY It prueecass
@The committee is ihhnimous la the
belief that Roberts gighs not to re-
main q incmbcr Of the bouse. Thema-
iority ID 81 the opinion he ought not
10 be pefpitted to become member
ina that the house has a right 10 exa
Glide him.
The report then proceeds TO eoDtrot
vert the posltion that one may be ex-
sludsd only Tor falling 10 meet the
qualifications specified ia the constl-
Itution, and says that crime Is sufii-
eient cause. II cites the authority Of
text book writers and decisions Or
state courts, and says the house has
never denied its right IN this direea
ton. On the contrary, II has frequent-
IN asserted il md cites the test oath
act passed ia 1862 disqualifylng hun-
3reds of thousands of citizens for
membership in congress. Arguing
against admission, TO be followed by
expulsion, the report holds that * is
doubtful whether IL can be legally
loEe, az the expulsiort clause of the
Constitution seems % contemplate
only sdiaordefly Behavior" fhe re-
sort continues;
AThe ablest lawyers from the Begin
ming Of the republic have NO insisted
and their reasoning has been 80 CO.
gent, these proposition have been es-
tRblished, namely;
Fl. Neither house Of congress ever
expelled q member for acts unrelated
10 him as a member or inconsistent
with his pnblic trust and duty as such,
2. Both houses have many times rec
fused TO expel where the guilt Of q
member was apparent, refusal TO eSpel
being put upon the ground that the
house or senate, as the case might be,
had no right to expel for an act unre-
lated TO a member as such, or because
II was committed prior to his cleo
tion."
The report concludes as followsi =
mindful of the gravity of the ques-
Hon and realizing the responsibility
imposed upon us, we recommend the
adoption of the following resolution:
aResolved, That under the facts and
circumstances OF this case, Brigham
IlI. Roberts, epresentatiye-elect from
the state of Utah, ought not 70 have
or TO hold O seat IN the house OF repre-
sentatives and that the seat 60 which
he was elected Is hereby declared va
can't
The report goes on to argue at
length in favor OF exclusion, saying II
Is IN accord with authority and with
Legislative precedent while expulsion
Is against precedent. 1t declares there
are three grounds OF disqualification
against Roberts;
i. Violation OF the Edmunds law.
2. Defiant violation of law, decisions
pf the supreme court and proclaIna-
.ions Of the president.
81. His election was an explicit viola
lion OF the understanding when Utah
mas admitted as state.
The minority report is signed by
Littlefiefl, republican, OF Maine, and
De Armond, democrat, Of Missouri. II
IS devoted to an argument in favor Of
Ieating Roberts and then sxpelling
him on the ground that he was legally
klected and that his polygaInous prae-
tees are not a constitutional bar,
The report makes a special point Of
the danger OF exclusion on any ex-
eept constitutional grounds lest In
the future II be taken advantage of by
some party with q narrow majority
TO strengthen its position.