The times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1897-1901, 1900-01-25

OF repose. 1t was an unusual tribute to a
member, even in the emotional and hys-
terical House.
Mr.. Lacey of Iowa. who wants the ma
jority resolution amended so as to provide
for MIR. Roberts expulsion, made an ar
gument in support of his amendment to
the effect that Roberts was a member of
the House, and that the only way OF
reaching him was by expulsion. He was
interrupted by many questions. but not
TO be moved from his position Roberts
ought to be expelled he continued, but
he could not be kept out because of his
practice of polygamy. that offence not
having been made cause of iuelgibility
by the Constitution.
\ strict Constructionist.
Mr.. Miers of Indiana, a member of the
special committee. said that as strict
constructionist Of the Constitution, he
believed the House had the power to
expel the gentleman from Utah and not
administer to him the oath OF office-that
1t was legal. constitutional. and orderly
procedure to meet him at the door and
exclude him from the House. He was
free to confess. however, that to enter
upon discussion of the difference be-
tween excluding him and expelling him
tweedledee and tweedledum. lLaughter.l
He could not agree with the gentlemen
from Maine and Missouri. the minority
of the committee, that the founders of
the Constitution ever contemplated the
necessity of the House doing the un-
necessary thing which they said the
House must do in this case. Neither
could he agree with his colleague (Mr.
Landisb in his narration of the facts and
join him in denouncing the State of Utah
as disloyal to the anti-poiysamy statute.
The evidence before the committee, he
said. led him to accept as true the asser-
tion that so far as the State was con-
cerned polygamy had been abandoned. and
it was thing of the past. He discussed
the question of the power of Congress to
add to or modify the requirements Of ell
gibility to membership contained in the
Constitution, contending that it could
do so.
The report OF the majority and its action
were supported and defended by Mr.. Nc
Pherson of Iowa. a member of the special
committee. He reviewed the speech of Mr..
Littlefield. which. lie said. demonstrated
anew the truth OF the oil assertion that
there was nothing new under the sun.
Entirely without Precedent.
This theory, that Utah may be disci-
plined for polygamy, is apparently evolved
for the purposes of this case. is entirely
without precedent. and has not even the
conjecture or dream Of any writer or COM
mentat0r on the Constitution TO stand
upon" Mr.. Mcpherson said was unwar-
ranted Chief Justice Chase. in the
case OF Texas VS.. White tSeventh Wal
Iacel. he said. had declared that the
conduct of a State might be such as
10 justify the House OF Representa-
tives in refusing to admit its Repre-
sentatives. II the gentleman from Mains
desired TO hold the good opinion of the
bar of the country, which Mr. Mcpherson
said he believed he was entitled to, he
would rryise that speech before it was
printed in the Congressional Record"
Mr.. Roberts Character.
Mr. Crumpac<er of Indiana opposed the
seating of Roberts for the reason that his
character was such as to be a shame and
a disgrace for the House to receive. and
that he was a propagaudist of a social or
der that was at war with civilization. Re-
garding the proposition that the power Of
exclusion could or should be used TO coerce
a State Crumpaeker said that il it were
once conceded. then the very thing against
which the trainers OF the Constitution
sought to safeguard the s,a3ller States OF
tue l 0lDu NDulu nave pteu accomplished.
Exclusion, proposed by the majority. in
his opinion was expulsion by restriction
and should command a twO-thirds vote.
member enquired IL II would require a
two thirds vote TO pass the majority reso-
luton.
Mr.. Crumpacker-ff were in that chair
1t would.
Mr. Wilson OF Idaho. in whose State
81, 900 Mormons reside. supported the mi
had no power to add to the requirements
of eligibility fixed by the Constitution.
He recited the recent history of the Nor
mon Church and asserted that the mani
festo OF 1890 absolying the members OF
the church from III, duty OF practicing
polygamy, was issued in good faith and
had been lived up to. Not plural mar
riage, he asserted, had been entered into
since it was issued