Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1926-12-26
SMITH CASE GIVES SENATE
NEW PROBLEM In RIGHTS
Authority to Deny Seat to Senator-Elect
or to Expel Him Argued Pro and
Con-Chances Not Bright.

eral of the United States, in recently
published volume entitled 1.-THE Van
fishing Rights of the States" devotes
| a. chapter to the provisions Of the
Constitution regarding the power OF
the Senate to deal with the "qualifica
tons" of a man who presents himself
for admission to that body. In It he
contends that the Senate is limited
by the qualifications specified in the
Constitution; that it cannot go beyond
those qualifications In passing tudg
ment If he is correct, then It is
obvious that the Senate has no right
to reject the appointment of Col
Smith.
ITO permit the Senate to eXpel a
Senator on the ground that before his
election he had been either a fool or a
knave would revolutionize our theory
Of constitutional government" said
Mr.. Beck.
Mr.. Beck points out that the ex-
press provision in the Constitution de-
claring that no person who has been
in instruction or rebellion against the
United States may be seated was in
serted in the fourteenth amendment,
the result of the Civil War. The dis
ability which this amendment imposed
secession is no longer of practical
Importance. 1t has long since been
removed.
Amendment Was Needed.
But Mr.. Beck points out that this
section of the Constitution is Of the
greatest significance in the present
controversy over Smith, since 1t be-
comes clear that ut required a con-
Stitutional amendment to invest the
Senate with the right to exclude any
one, even though he had engaged in
a war to destroy the United States.
He argues that If the Senate had au-
thority to pass upon qualifications of
Senator'S, other than those already
specified in the Constitution ITSELF, it
would not have been necessary to
adopt the amendment concerning men
who had taken part in the war against
the United States.
Mr.. Beck's contention, and it will
be the contention Of those supporting
Smith, is that the powers not delegat.
ed to the United States by the Con
stitution, nor prohibited by it to the
States, are reserved to the StatesSre.
spectively or to the people.
THE people of the United States"
says Mr.. Beck, may justifiably think
the State illinois in this easel has
sent to Congress an unfit man. None
the less the State has the right Tin
this case the governor) to send him.
1t is Its sole concern, and to nullify its
choice Is to destroy the basic right of
sovereign State, and amounts to a
revolution"
Expulsion Provided For.
Some of the opponents Of Col.
Smith take the opposite view. They
stoutly maintain that the Senate has
the right to pass on all the qualifica-
tons of Senator. They contend that
II a man presents himself with a
record OF misdeeds he may be denied
a seat; that II he is a member Of the
Senate and perpetrates a misdeed he
may be expelled. The Constitution
itself provides for the expulsion of a
member. of the Senate: or House by a
two-thirds vote OF either body.
If the Senate should decide to per.
init Col. Smith to be sworn in and
take his seat at this session, on the
appointment of Gov. Small, the next
move would be q further considera.
ton of his case by either the Reed
slush fund committee or the commit.
tee on privileges and elections, as the
Senate might direct. The wording
of a resolution brought into the
Senate would either deny Smith a
seat or provide for his expulsion.
The belief is Expressed by Senators
who have looked into the matter that
Smith. once seated, would have to be
expelled, and that two-thirds vote
would be necessary to- accomplish
this Not all Senators take this view
however, some them insisting that
the Senate could deny him q right to
| his seat on his qualifications bv a
majority vote, even after he had been
formally admitted to the body. Those
who believe that Smith would have to
be expelled by a two-thirds vote if
ne were seated are asking to halt him
at the door, to send his credentials to
the Reed committee without delay
and to take action upon a resolution
Denying him a seat without his ever
taking the oath of office.
Different Status Next Session.
When the case Of Col. Smith comes
UP in the Senate in the SEVENTEEN
Congress and he presents himself as
| Senator-eelect to be sworn in. the
situation will be somewhat different
The contest will become one not only
of his qualifications, but of the valid
ity Of his election. His opponents
| will contend that the primary cleo
ton is an essential part of the choice
| of a Senator. and that If there was
fraud or corruption in the primary II
| should disqualify Col Smith. His
supporters, on the other hand, Will
insist that the Senate has no juris
| diction over the. primary election
which they will hold is a. State affai,
entirely. However, it Is as difficult to
| discOnnect the primary and the gen
| eral election as it is to nullify the
connection which exists between q
chicken and an egg or between the
egg and the chicken.
| In the interest of Col Smith and OF
Mr.. Ware, the argument will be ad
| Vanced that the people of Illinois anc
Of Pennsylvania elected them to the
Senate after the publication of the
| revelations before the Senate slusk
| fund committee; that they are thu
choice of the voters of these States
notwithstanding the public charges
which were made against them, anl
that to deny them seats in the Sen
| ate would be to deny the States the
right of free choice of their. repre-
sentatiVes in the Senate. :
| The arguments pro and con Smith
and Ware doubtless will deal mucf
| WIN the CONSTITUTION, the rights q
the Senate and of the States undea
that instrument. In cases whert
there is so much to be said on both
sides, however. including the right OF
the Senate " protect itself or to purge
4 itself, the questions are likely to BIZ
| decided according to the sentiment
of the majority of the Senate, which
in turn may be influenced by the
sentiment of the people. The chances
for Smith at this session or fol
Smith and Ware in the next Con
gress do not appear bright.
! Graduates Immigrate.