Virginian-pilot. (Norfolk, Va.) 1898-1911, 1900-01-24
ROBERTS CASE TIE HOUSE
Continued from Page I.

dicial authority. Neither the presence
nor The absence Of certain words in the
constitution can imply a certain mean
Ing, If 1t Is impossible that such mean
ing could have been expressed
If the member-elect from Utah Is ELI
gible to be q representative in Congress.
then. for the purpose of his case, we
must read into the constitution a pro-
Vlso that would read. provided that
no person shall be Ineligible to seat
as such representative who in form
and substance, in word and act. in life
and practice, defies the constitution and
the laws, and denies their validity and
supremacy"
HOW THE CASE STANDS.
Thus stands the case then: If the
minority be right, the trainers of the
constitution. if they had foreseen the
Roberts Incident, with Its defiance Of
the constitution and the law, and its
denial of their validity and supremacy
as to him would have said, Brigham
III. Roberts is eligible and must be
seated lf elected.
i say that no such provision could
have been adopted; and If 1t could not
cannot be implied" Passing aside the
moral side OF this question which. he
said, In, the face of the great funda-
mental fact of disobedicnce to law, plus
audacious defiance OF it, he did not
care to assert now he said: but we
are told that it is n power that may
be abused. What power does the
House possess that 1t has not at some
time abused? And shall they, there
fore, be shorn Of powers?
"lf we do not exclude this man. we
strike down one OF the most vital and
necessary powers that belong to a great
legislative body. Let not such thing
pc done. IL 1t is not. we may be sure,
that never again, while the spirit of
civilization dominates this republic,
will any defiant violator of law under
color Of religious or any other claim,
whether polygamist or murderer, knock
Tor admission Mt the door of the Anerl-
can Congress-"
PRECEnENTS FOR EXCLUSION.
Mr.. Tayler was emphatic in his rs
sertion that exclusion was in harmony
with precedent; expulsion in violation of
1t. He ampllfied the three grounds for
Mr.. Roberts exclusion: first because
of his violation of the Edmunds act:
second. because he was living in open,
fragrant and notorious violation of the
statutes Of the Congress he seeks to
enter. and. third. because his election
was violation of the compact by
which Utah was admitted into the
Union.
4 THE MINORITY'S CONTENTION.
Mr.. Littlefeld (NIainc) for the mi
nority OF the committee was the mi
nority spokesman. The only issue be-
tween the majority and minority was
as to whether he should be expelled
or excluded.
The constitutional qualifications, age
and inhabitancy. Mr.. Littlefield argued.
4 could NOT he added IN
and the House now excluded mem
Der because he was guilty OF polyGa-
NOUS practices next year, 1T might eX-
clude for adultery or because n mcm-
Der was an attorney for a trust or an
octopus or for any other reason The
right OF n member to his seat was n
constitutional right. He went back to
the constitutional debates and other
early history TO prove that Congress
couid not add to the qualifications OF
members negatively stated in the con-
stitution.
RlDlCULED AUTHORITIES.
After depicting the conditions that
surrounded the framing of this pro-
vision of the constitution and quoting
Madison, Hamilton and Jefferson. he
asked triumphantly who there was who
couiu shatter the crucible of history
With SHi OuIltlcd II OF the UoCI1rlt ion
of the men who framed it, He chal-
lcnged and ridiculcd many of the ma
3ority's authorities ana precedents. He
said the minority stood with Burke.
Jefferson. Madison, Hamilton. Morris.
Webster Storey. Cooley, John Randolph
Tucker
~ believe" said Mr.. Littleneld. that
Mr. Roberts has n full constitutional
right to seat in this House"
The applause which followed swept
over the floor and to the galleries
Mr. Littlefeld urged there was no
reason why presidents should be slav.
!shiy followed, referring to the manner
In which ex-Speaker Reed had over.
turned the presidents of a. century and
converted the House from an unor-
ganized mob into an instrument which
registered the will of the people.
MIR. Lituefield then turned to the con-
slderation Of the proposition that If the
touse had right to add to the quail
1cations Of a member the disqualified
ton imposed by the Edmunds act did
not apply to Mr.. Roberts because n
member of Congress was not an officer
under the United States" within the
meaning OF the statute. He then at
lacked the proposition of the majority
that Mr.. Roberts had violated the COM
pact between Utah and the United
STATES He asked for the authority for
the statement OF an understanding and
eloquently declared that the idea. of a
compact between the States had been
the father OF secession blotted out nv
the lives Of half million men. lie
pointed to General Vheeler's return
from the Spanish war, covered with
iaureis, when no mere sentiment let
the speaker and the Judiciary commit