Evening star., 1935-05-21

Continued From First Page.)
he was not eligible at the time OF his
election last November and that he
was not eligible at the time the term
Of office for which he was elected be-
gan on January 3. They hold that if
it Is legal for Holt to have been
elected to term as Senator when he
would not be eligible until six months
after term began, it would be equally
legal for him to be elected to term
when he would not be eligible to
serve until year. two years or even
FIVE years after his election. Such a
condition would deny to the State of
West Virginia its right to be repre-
sented in the Senate at all times by
two Senators, right provided in the
Constitution.
The Constitution lays down three
qualifications for Senator. One is
that a Senator must be 80 years old.
The second is that he must have been
q citizen of the United States for nine
years and the third is that he must
be a resident of the State of which he
Is elected a representative.
Rely on Shields Case.
One of the precedentS on which the
opponents of Holt particularly rely
was the case of Gen. James Shields,
who was elected as a Democrat to the
Senate from Illinois for the term COM
mencing March 4, 1849. Upon his ap-
pearance to take his seat March 5,
1849. a resolution was presented rails
ing the question of his eligibility on
the ground that he had not been a
citizen of the United States for the
number Of years required by the Con-
stitution. Shields took his seat March
s. but March IS the Senate declared
his election void.
The Senate at that time made
point of the fact Shields was not
eligible to become Senator under the
terms of the Constitution at the time
when the term for which he was elect
ed began. This case seems to be on
all fours with that of Rush D. Holt.
The supporters of Holt point to the
fact that Henry Clay became a SEN
ator from Kentucky when he was only
20 years old. There is apparently no
lCIOlo W SllOh, 4lOWCSCl, LlldC ally OU-
lection was ever raised to the seating
of Clay on account of his age, nor
that the question came before the
Senate at all.
Claimed Self Eligible.
The memorial presented to the Sem
ate Committee by opponents of Holt
sets forth that under the State law of
~i,,io IJ@I
at the time of the Democratic primary
last year stating he was qualified for
the Office for which he aspired to be
a candidate. The contention is made
that he was clearly not qualified under
the terms of the Constitution.
Former Senator Hatfield, in his con-
test against Holt, lays claim to the
election. There is no slightest chance,
however, that Hatfield would be de-
clared elected, If the Senate should
refuse to seat Holt. Hatfield trailed
far behind Holt in the election count.
The Governor of West Virginia, a
Democrat, would appoint to fill the
vacancy. He would, of course, appoint
o Democrat.
The Democrats in West Virginia
have been rather badly split into fac
tons, with the Governor, Glen Shaver,
and other leaders heading one faction,
and Senator Nicely heading another.
Holt is of the Nicely faction. Clem
Shaver was favored by Postmaster
General Farley, chairman of the
Democratic National Committee, dur
ing the primary campaign last year.
Senator Borah of Idaho is one of
those who maintains that Holt
clearly vas not eligible under the
Constitution to become Senator at
the beginning of the term of office for
which he was elected.