Evening star., 1926-04-11
CONGRESS In QUANDARY
OVER TRIAL OF ENGLISH
Ri ght of Senate to Sit as Court OF
Impeachment i'm Absence of
House Disputed.

prised of the action of trs Senate.
made a verbal report to the House
as follows: 1.-The plan of the man.
ayers on the part of the House has
been this-to ip- the Senate as
court of Impeachment to allow
Congress to adjourn and then sit
as a court to carry on the case. But
there are two reasons against that
which render 1t conclusive that the
Senate will not do so. The first IS
that many Senators doubt the power
of the Senate to sit as IA court of
Impeachment after the adjournment
of Congress. The great. and the
really practicable reason is that it
will be found impossible to keep a
quorum of the court together after
the adjournment of Congress-"
Precedent Not Controlling.
The Belknap case is the only i'm
peachment case In which this question
has been raised. OF course. the prec-
edent of that case does not control
the present Senate; but it throws
light upon the probable action that
may be taken in the English case.
The procedure in the Belknap case
was under discussion in the Senate in
June, 1876. which was just prior to
the memorable Hayes -Tilden campaign
and this time the question comes
up prior to an election which will in
vOlve 81 SenatorS-and all of this in
wolves the doubt as to whether a
quorum of the Senate could be count
| ed on during a session throughout the
Summer for the impeachment trial.
Under the circumstances a good
many of the legislative students and
managers are predicting that the
| English trial will not take place until
l of
| in December
| A subcommittee of the Senate
| Judiciary committee has been appointed
| to study the situation and report on
| the precedentS as to whether the
| Senate may sit in special session as
| a court of impeachment without the
| House also sitting. This sub-commit
| tee is composed of Senators Albert r.
| Cummins, Iowa; Charles S. Deneen,
Illinois; Lee S. Overman. North Caro-
| lima, and Thomas $. Walsh, Montana.
AS against the line Of precedent and
| argument outlined above, there are
good authorities on the Constitution
and legislative procedure who say
| there is little or no doubt, even in
| the light Of the Belknap case, which
| they claim is not q precedent, that
the Senate can SIT in special session
as a court of impeachment while the
| House is adjourned, and that If the
Senate is called into special session
there is no reason why the House also
| would have to be called.
Functions of Senate.
They point out that the Senate has
three functions to perform under the
| Constitution: Q To advise and con-
sent on nominations for public office
made by the President; (2) to ratify
I (2l-h,1f he Leo CT
portant-to sit as court of impeach-
ment.
Now, 1t has happened frequently in
| our history that the Senate has been
| called in special session for the first
| two mentioned purposes, and why
may it not be called in special session
to perform the third Of these consti-
tutional duties?
| They are functions and duties i'm
posed solely upon the Senate by the
Constitution. The only relation to any
| of them that the House has is in the
/ Impeachment of a Federal officer, but
in the latter practice the House has
| delegated it's authority. after it has
| impeaChed an officer, to its managers
to take charge of the prosecution be
| fore the Senate, sitting as q court, in
all matters pertaining TO the trial.
This power being plenary, therefore it
is contended that it becomes neces-
sary for the House. that body having
| reposed it's confidence in it's managers
for the conduct of the case, to remain
in, or be in session during trial of the
! case.
! The Senate. being a continuing body
may either by proclamation of the
President. or by it's own order. con-
vene in special session for one or an
other of the three objects which. under
the Constitution, it is solely within
the power of the Senate to consider.