The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1900-01-21

WASHINGTON. Jan. 2o.-Reports Of the
special committee of investigation in the
| case OF Brigham Roberts, OF Utah. were
| presented to the hou2e today. The ma
| jority report. signed by Chairman Tay.
| Ter and six Of his associates. is q volumi-
| nous document and is accompanied by a
summary Of the law and facts. 1t gives
| the details of the hearings and ample
| opportunities afforded Mr.. Roberts to
present his case. his refusal to testify
| and the unanimous findings of facts here
| tofore published. 1t proceeds:
Report of the Majority.
"The committee is unanimous in its be-
lief that Mr.. Roberts ought not to re-
main a member of the house of repre-
sentatives. A majority are of the opin-
| ion that he ought not to be permitted
to become a member; that the house Mas
/ the right to exclude him. A minority
are Of the opinion that the proper course
| Of procedure is to permit him to be sworn
In and then expel him by two-thirds
vote under the constitutional provision
providing for expulsion.
'Your committee desires to assert, with
the utmost positiveness at this point that
not only is the proposition Of expulsion
as applied to this case against precedent,
but the exclusion is entirely in accord
with principle, authority and legislative
precedent, and not antagonlstic to any
legislative action which the house of rep
resentatives has ever taken.
Differences i'm the Committee.
.sMFor convenience we present herewith,
B4fore proceeding to extended argument
In support of the committees resolution.
the following summary: Upon the facts
stated the majority of the committee as
sert that the claimant ought not to be
permitted to take a seat in the house OF
representatives, and that the seat to
which he was elected ought to be de-
clared vacant
"The minority, on the other hand. as
sert that he ought to be sworn in, in order
that IL happily two-thirds vote therefor
he may be expelled.
Grounds of Disqualification.
"Three distinct grounds for disqualifi-
cation are asserted against Roberts.
Il. BY reason Of his violation of the
Edmunds law.
"2 BY reason of his notorious and de-
fant violation Of the law of the land. of
the decisions of the supreme court and
Of the proclamations of the president,
holding himself above the law and not
amenable to 1t.
mo government could possibly exist In
the face of such practices He Is in
open war against the laws and tnstitu-
tions of the country whose congress he
seeks TO enteT. SuCE All lued Is lHtOleT-
able. 1t is upon the principle asserted
in this ground that all cases of exclusion
have been based.
s3. His election as representative Is an
explicit and offensive violation of the
understanding by which Utah was admit
ted as a state.
Argument of the Minority Met.
'The objection is made to the refusal
to admit Roberts that the constitution ex-
-I.!z
made to his coming in If he is 25 years old,
il he has been seven years citizen of the
United States, and was an inhabitant of
Utah when elected no matter how odious
or reasonable or criminal may have been
his life and practices. To this we reply:
II. That the language of the constitu-
tional provision, the history of its framing
in the constitutional convention, and it's
contest, clearly show that 1t cannot be
construed to prevent disqualification for
crime
'2. That the overwhelming authority of
text book writer's on the constitution Is to
the effect that such disqualification may be
imposed by the house, and no commentator
on the constitution specifically denies it.
'3. The courts of several of the states,
in constituting an analogous provision,
have with practical unanimity declared
against such narrow construction of such
constitutional provisions.
~. The house of representatives has
never denied that 1t has the right to exclude
a member-elect, even when he had the
three constitutional provisions.
'5. In many instances 1t has distinctly
asserted its right so to do, in cases of dis
| loyalty and crime.
"6 1t passed. in 1862, the test oath act,
which imposed a real and substantial dis
qualification for membership in congress,
disqualifying hundreds of thousands of
American citizens 1t remained in force
for twenty years, and thousands of MEM
bers of congress were compelled to take
the oath. If required. .t-...
~. The house, in 1869. adopted a gem
eral rule Of order, providing that no per-
son should be sworn In as a member
against whom the objection was made that
he was not entitled to take the test oath,
and If upon investigation such fact APP
peared. he was to be permanently deharred
from entrance.
Expulsion Not the Remedy.
IS. The interesting proposition is made
that the claimant be sworn in and then
turned out Upon the theory that the pur-
pose is to permanently part company with
Roberts, this Is dubious proceeding.
| Such action requires the vote of two-thirds
of the members. We ask II such a vote
| is possible or right, In view of the follow
| ing observations:
"The expulsion clause of the constitu-
| ton is as follows:
Each house may dstsrmine the rules