The sun., 1902-02-25
THE TYLLU.N-NL.tURIN CASE
Is the Power 10 Suspcn' Members Con-
stitniIonnlly MIN ihc senate?


To THE EDITOR oF TIRE SrN Sir: The
Senate on Saturday. BY n unanimous vote
passed the following resolution:
o,drrsd. That the two Senators from the state o.
South Carolina be declared In contempt Of th'
Senate on account o; the alteration and personal
encounter between them this day In oprn session
and that the matter BE- referred 10 IN" Committee
on Privileges and Elections. With instructions to
/ report Whit action shall DC taken by tho Senate In
regard Thereto
And the President pro TEN. OF the Sena .
officially defined the status OF the Senators
In these words
While these two Senators are declared 70 be IN
contempt. the Chair could not recognize either n he
should rise and address the chair.
This ruling Ia undoubtedly In accordance
with the rules and precedents Of the Senate.
but its enforcement may turn out " be a mat
ter Of some embarrassment. The same rule
that precludes the President pro TEN OF
the Senate from recognizing these Senators
would presumably apply to the Clerk OF the
Senate in calling the roll. otherwise we should
have the anomaly of the Clerk recognizing
Senators whom the presiding officer had re-
fused TO recognize.
But Section 3, Article J. Of the Constltu-
ton. which no rules OF the Senate can annul
or suspend. declares that each Senator shall
have one vote.
for upon any question before the Senate
while these Senators are In contempt. what
will the Clerk do when he calls the rol2 VIII
he omit the names OF the Senators from South
Carolina. or will he call them and record
their votes? II he omts them. he deprlves
each OF these Senators OF the vote which the
Constitution says he ehall have. II he calls
them. he recognizes as entitled TO vote Sena-
tors whom the presiding officer has declared
NJ Of 70 will pot Al
to say that the decision Of the President does
not affect the Clerk. for that would be to say
that while the resolution Of the Senate bound
the President, IL did not bind the Clerk. and
that while its effect was TO deprive these Sena-
tors of the privilege OF discussing q question.
1t did not affect their more substantial privi-
lege OF voting on IL.
Section OF the same article provides:
Each House may determine the rules OF It's pro-
cceiings, punish Its members for disorderly be-
havor. and, with the concurrence Of two -thirds,
cSpel a member.
II will hardly be contended that this section
authorizes either house TO adopt rules Of
proceeding or 70 infiot punishment in CON-
fiCt with the Constitution itself The power
to expel is expressly given and directly limited
by the provision that IL can only be eIer-
cised by two-thirds vote. But In case Of
expulsion the right OF the State TO be repre-
Section Of the same article for the appoint
ment OF SUCCESSORS in case OF vacancy by the
Legi stature. or. in its recess. the State RI-
ecutlve.
IT, therefore. the Senate should e1pel both
Senators from South Carolina, their places
could be filled at once by the State authori-
ties. But In the present status OF the case it
would seem that the resolution OF the Senate
In effect denies representation In the Senate to
that State pending the contempt proceedings.
Ii is fortunate that the Senate resolution was
a unanimous one. for this fact removes IL
from partisanship and allows a calm and un-
biased consideration OF the important Ques-
deprive State OF Its right Of representa-
tion in that body.
The Importance OF this question 10 en-
phasized by the fact that Article V. Of the
Constitution. which provides for Its amend
ment in other respects. declares:
No State without its consent shall be deprived
OF It's equal suffrage In the Senate.
Can the Senate by It's rules Of proceedings
do even temporarily what the Constitution
forbids to be done at all. under any circum-
stances. even by the people themselves?
1t is eminently proper that the Senate
should preserve Its dignity and decorum by
taking such measures in this matter as will
prevent such occurrences as those OF last
Saturday. and IL is TO be hoped that the Com
mittee on Privileges and Elections will
promptly recommend such action as will ac-
complish that obi Jet without dcpriving State
of the equal suffrage guaranteed to 1t by the
Constitution. JST
WASHINGTON. Feb ?s.