The times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1897-1901, 1900-04-24
FOR AND AGAINST QUAY
Concluding Arguments on the Case
Begun in the Senate.
The Debate Opened by Mr.. Chandler.
Who supports the PennsyIvaainn's
Claim 10 Sent-Mr. Plat OF
Connecticut RepIies-Spccches of
Messrs. QuarIcs and Penrose.

Messrs. QuarIes and Penrose
The discussion of the Quay case was
taken up in earnest by the Senate yester-
day and nearly the whole OF the days
session was devoted to it. The opening
argument, which was in favor of amending
the resolution declaring that Nr. Quay is
not entitled to a seat by striking out the
word not" and Of admitting the Pennsyl-
vania claimant on the credentials submit
ted by him, was made by Mr.. Chandler.
The position taken by him was supported
By Messrs. Kenney and Penrose, while
long arguments in opposition to the seat
ing of Mr.. Quay were made by Messrs.
Plat of Connecticut and Quarles.
In beginning his speech Mr.. Chandler
said he felt that it was perfectly apparent
that there should be no political or per-
sonal feeling in deciding a constitutional
question. and that he had no remarks to
make in the way of asking Senators to
vote on the case in accordance with such
feelings. He referred to the fact that let
tiers had been written and statements
bad man, and others to the effect that he
was good man. Letters of this nature, he
said, had been addressed to him both in
regard TO the Quay case and to the Mon
tana election case. He thought that in de-
Gliding a constitutional question Senators
should lay aside all consideration except
those of law and Of right.
RumOrs of n Bargain.
Mr.. Chandler said that rumors had been
floating about both outside the Senate
chamber and within it to the effect that a
bargain had been made between Senators
who were friends of Mr.. Quay and those
who were friendly to another Senator
whose right to a seat was being contested
(referring to Senator Clark of Montana),
whereby they were to work together in
trying TO seat both the claimants.
Il shall not waste time on these rumors, ="
said Mr.. Chandler. because 1 have been
requested by both sides to deny that there
is the slightest ground for these rumors.
They are mere hghaent OF a diseased i'm
agfnation. OF course they could have no
effect upon the vote OF any Senator: but |
say this much to correct any misapprehen-
sion outside of this chamber. ! ask Sena-
tors to dismiss from their mind any idea
that anybody believes that votes could be
Influenced by these rumors of bargain.
for necessarily no Senator could be infiu-
enced by any idea of that kind unless he
was prepared to produce some proof of
the charge made"
Mr.. Chandler then made an extended ar
gument in support of his Interpretation Of
the meaning of the Constitution, which
was that the Senate should at all times
have full representation from all the
States. He had prepared a number of
type-written copies of the clause Of the
Constitution to which Re referred. and
after sending one of them to each OF
number of Senators whom he knew op-
posed his contention he asked how, after
reading that paragraph anyone could in
terpret it as meaning anything different
from what he had stated.
The opposition base their arguments
largely upon the meaning of one or two
words,'' he went on. but in order to
make that clause convey the meaning
which they ascribe to it twenty-five words
at least would have to be added"
He then read the clause with the words
Incorporated in il which he considered
necessary to give it the meaning claimed
by the opposition. He held, too, that the
Governor of Pennsylvania was not bound
in this case by the provision of the con-
stitution of Pennsylvania requiring that
gether 10 dll vacancies in the Senatorial |
because this vacancy had |
not occurred during recess Of the Legis- |
lature as indicated by the Pennsylvania |
constitution, but during a session of the |
Legislature.
As the Legislature had failed to elect, |
Mr.. Chandler maintained that the Gov |
ernor clearly had the right TO appoint Mr.. |
Quay or anybody else. Adverting to the |
two cases of Mantle and of Corbett, he |
declared they were not fair precedents |
upon which to base action.
II know Senators" said he, land I'm |
not going to mention names, who voted |
against Mantle because he was what was |
called silver Senator and / know that |
some Senators. perhaps in a spirit Of re- !
taliation, voted against Corbett because |
be was what was called gold Senator. |
We believe that the doctrine we are ad- |
is the true doctrine and we shall |
persist in pressing ii upon the Senate. |
bound by the vote in the Corbett case"
Mr.. Piatt's Argument.
Mr.. Platt of Connecticut replied to Mr.. !
and in q long argument main
tanned that on purely constitutional |
grounds. sustained by years of precedent,
Mr. Quay was not entitled to a seat in
the Senate.
''It seems to me-" he said. that one
question lies in the forefront OF this dis
russion-one which has not been sufh-
ciently dwelt upon by those who think
Mr.. Quay is not entitled to seat here,
and one upon which there has been not
able silence by those who think he is en-
titled to a seat. This question is wheth-
cr anything can ever be considered as set /
tied in the Senate OF the United States. |
Is the Senate, now in the 112th year of
its existence, to observe the almost un-
broken line of precedents or is II to be |
by political and personal friend
chips?
81 am sorry" he continued, that any
Senator should make a charge against six
teen Senators that they voted against a
Senator because of personal or political
reasons and not on constitutional grounds.
That charge is one which reflects greater
dishonor upon the Senate than any that
has ever been made"
why is the Senator sorry?" Mr.. Chan
der interposed. Ought such statements
zsssssssssssssssssssssss