Akron daily Democrat. [volume] (Akron, Ohio) 1892-1902, 1900-01-24

defiant vioiater Of law under color of re-
ligion or any other claim. whether polyg-
amist or murderer. knock for admission
at the door OF the American Congress-.
There were no demonstrations through
out Mr.. Taylcr's Speech but at the con-
ciusion he was vigorously applauded.
Mr.. Littlefield took issue with the
majority as to the power Of the house
TO expel q member for acts committed
before his entrance into the house, cit.
ing case after case In support Of his con.
tention. First he went back to the case
Of john Wilkes, the famous English
champion OF free speech OF commons, the
second time for an act for which he had
been sent to prison five years before. He
quoted from Junius' letters the denun.
citation Of the ''damnable doctrine that
d single house Of parliament could
either suspend or abrogate the law of
the land" He went back to the con-
stitutional debates to prove that con.
gress could not add to the qualifications
Of members negatively stated in tine con-
Htitution. s
After depicting the conditions that
surrounded the framing Of this prOvi.
sion OF the constitution and quoting the
words Of Madison, Hamilton and Jeffer-
son, he asked triumphantly who there
was who could shatter the crucible Of
history which surrounded IL, or the deo.
laration Of the men who framed it. Who
would undertake to impeach the integ.
rity OF the men who were present at the
dawn Of our history?
Some Of the precedents cited by Mr..
Tayler were ridiculed by Mr.. Littlefield.
He also challenged Mr.. Tayler's au-
thor1ties. MIR. Littlefeld said that the
majority were driven back to support
their contention for additional qualifi-
catious upon the general welfare clause
of the constitution. He won the first
burst OF applause while ridiculing the
attempt OF the minority to dispose Of
Justice Story's opinion by stating that
he had sought to give his own ideas,
but only the ideas of others. They
would, said Mr.. Iittlefeld, make him
the Boswell Of the constitution. +"
[Great laughter
Mr.. Lttlefield said the minority stood
with Burke, the statesman Of the Eigh-
teenth century, with jefferson, Madi.
son. Hamilton, GOuveneur Morris and
the men who framed the constitution,
with the deolsions Of the courts of
Maryland. Montana and Virginia, with
the opinions OF Story. Cooley, Cushing,
John Randolph Tucker and Webster,
He then challenged Mr.. Tayler's state.
ment that no precedent existed against
exclusion. citing the case Of Benjamin
Stark in the senate in 1869, who was
charged with disloyalty. yet who was
seated by the senate without prejudice
to subsequent action against him.
The majority, he pointed out. had
cited this case. but had not informed
the house of this fact,
II believe" said Mr.. Littlefeld, con.
cluding his comment on this particular
case, that Mr.. Roberts has full con.
stitutional right to n seat in this house,"
Proceeding he pointed out the un.
questioned right Of either house to expel
q member for any cause deemed sutfi.
cient. This power was unquestioned,
and before IL was exercised Mr., Roberts
should be sworn in.
1--WE state upon our conscicnces and
oaths," said he, "that he should have
the full benefit of the Fundamental law
OF the land" [Great applause.
At the conclusion Of Mr.. Littlefleld's
speech, Mr.. Tayler renewed his request
for an agreement for q vote ut 4:30 on
Thursday. This was objected to and
Mr.. Roberts was then given one hour
and half in which to present his side
Of the case.
The two arguments just presented, he
began, made it appear that there was
difference Of opinion as to the method
of procedure in the case OF the member
from Utah." From his standpoint he
could agree with neither view pre-.
sented.
II find myself in the position, said
he, "where l might say with propriety:
"'A plague on both your houses, )
since both propose my undoing."
Laughter. But, he continued, the
situation was not altogether without its
advantages. Ho was convinced with
the minority that the house had no
right to exclude him and with the ma.
jority that, once admitted. he could not
be expelled. Between the two," said
he, "matters fall out about as l would
have them and substantial justice will
be done" Renewed laughter.
Mr.. Roberts gave notice that he
should appropriate the arguments of the
majority against expulsion and those of
the minority against exclusion.
His constitutional qualifications were
admitted by both the majority and mi
nority Of the committee, and he de.
clared that the members OF the house, ir
their country, would call him back to
the bar from which he had been I'm.
properly turned away. He warned the
house that nations fell because they de-
parted from their traditions. II a nation
indulged In constitutional immortality,
1t died Us did the individual who was
guilty of physical immortality" He be.
seoched the house not to yield to tho
clamor Of unthinking people.
Ho defended the action Of the Nor.
mons In fighting the authority of the
United States for years because, he
said, they believed that sentiment would
change, aud dramatically stated that in
those days he had rather have his flesh
hewn from his bones rather than to
have renounced his religious tenets.
He concluded with o peroration in
which he said he had never been con-
scious OF shameful act, and II he was
sent forth he would go with head erect
and undaunted brow.
No agreement has yet been reached.
Chairman Tayler. Of the special com
mittee, made agreement impossible by
objecting to an amendment by Repre-
sentative Lacey of Iowa. who wants to
change the resolution SO that instead of
the seat being declared vacant the rec
ord will show that Roberts was ex-
pelled before he was q member. Late
In the day, when Mr.. Tayler withdrew
his objection. another obstaele was
raised by new member who wanted
al assurance that others than members
OF the committee will have an oppor.
tunity to talk.