The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1909-04-25
VACANCIES" IN THE SENATE.

in the Senate by gubernatorial appoint
ment is up again, this time in the case
Of two Southern Senators, Alexander f.
CLAY of Georgia and Duncan U. Fletcher
Of Florida. These gentlemen claim
their seats by virtue Of appointments
! from the Governors of Georgia ana
Florida, respectively.
! The question has been decided here"
/ toforc hv the Senate, which is the
! Judge of the election and Quailfcatlon
Of it's members, in different ways. Inc
/ most recent decision, and ono which mas
/ been followed in number OF cases,
I is. stated in general terms, that when
ever the Legislature has the right ana
an opporfunity to fill vacancy oc'
curing either before or after ITS scS'
! sion begins, and fails to NIL thaC
vacancy, the executive cannot lnefe-
/ after lawfully appoint Senator. 1 MS
applies specifically, and the doctrine mas
ocnorallv been enforced, in cases where
tbo LEGISLATURE fails to elect on the
expiration Of the Senatorial term; the
constitutional recognition of the power
Of the Governor 10 appoint IN case
vacancy happens being limited 10 Vne
occurrence of vacancy by death OF
RESIGNATION while the Legislature of the
State affected is not in session.
The practice became practically set
fled on these lines in considering the
appointments from Western States, ana
osnecially in the Montana and Oregon
cases Later came on the case of Sen
ator Quay Of Pennsylvania, who came
within one vote of overturnng the RUE
This vote he had promised by Senator
Mcbride of Oregon, which State had
suffered the deprivation Of ITS Scna'
torial representation by the enforcement
of the aforesaid rule, and 1t was cA-
pected that Senator Mcbride, by reason
Of the discomfort of his State with tins
narrow rule and by reason OF the
promise he had given to vote TO scat
Mr.. QUAY, would vote to overturn thaC
ruIc But by the narrow margin OF
one vote. and that vote promised Tor
his support, Quay was beaten, and inc
precodent was followed. There can be
no doubt but that if the Montana and
Oregon precedents had been out OF the
way. Senator Quay would have won
And we believe that he ought to have
won and that the final rule of the SEN
ale will be that where the Legislature
fails to elect, the Governor may ap-
point,
We believe that to be the better rule,
and the rule in more exact conformity
70 the ideas of the Fathers of the Re-
public Any one who recalls the de-
bates in the Federal Constitutional Con-
veution, and more particularly the
manifest jealousy of the then Colonies
as TO the rights Of each as States IN the
proposed new Union, cannot fail, 1t
seems TO us. to come to The conclusion
that if this question had been broached
in the form which it has taken IN the
Senate in comparatively recent years,
the unanimous opinion of the Constltu-
tional Convention would have been that
in providing the two means of secur-
ing the equal representation Of the
States in The Union, the intent was to
provide against all contingencies for
full. representation. 1t is not possible
to think that the makers of the Consti-
tuition could have decided otherwise
than as Indicated; that where the Legls.
lature fails TO elect, the Governor
must appoint. Because the great thing
with the delegates in that Constitu-
tlonal Convention was TO preserve the
rights Of their respective Colonies,
which were to be the States. And In
providing the double means to secure
this representation it cannot be sup
posed that they wished to close out the
right Of the State to its full representa-
ton in the Senate without the cXhaus
ton Of both means to secure that
representation. To say that because the
Legislature fails 10 elect, therefore the
State consents TO lose its presentation,
is TO enforce a rule against the States
that we cannot believe was ever con
templated by the makers Of the Consti
tuition In providing the alternative ap-
pointment by the Governor in case of
vacancy, it is not possible that the
makers of the Constitution had any
idea in the world that there could be
any contingency whereby the States
would not each have its two Senators.
as guaranteed in the Constitution.
The rule referred to was a snap iudg.
ment. taken because Of fear among
the conservative and hide bound Sena-
tors of the East lest their localities
should be overwhelmed by the abund-
ancc Of representation of Senators