Show OP or W MOULTON lf or ILLINOIS 11 in the mme ame or f mcl april logli 1883 1882 alio house hn ing under consideration the utah contested e election coso case mr moulton said air mr speaker if I call baie the attention of the house I shall be able I think to state in avery a very short time the views which I entert entertain zain I shall confine myself exclusively to what I conceive ceide to be the points in t the lie case and to the tile law and constitution that applies in this thia case A very wide latitude has been indulged in in by gentlemen who have preceded me inthis in this discussion somo some of them as I think not touching a sing single I point that is really involved in this case F for or instance my friend from front pennsylvania mr beltzhoover and my friend from Wis wisconsin conein mr air hazelton occupied most of their time in in discussing Ew t a proposition that has n never e ver be been e n coU contended tended for b by tho tile minority of tho tile committee that is is not lot contended for by me and lias has been admitted by everybody for the list ninety years yeam that there is is a difre difference ren between a delc delegate ate from a territory and a representative from a state no pemon so far as I know has ever denied that proposition it is distinctly admitted in the minority report and more thap that one of the main ar arguments gu of the minority upon which they rest their conclusion is the fact of that very y distinction therefore I say those thos a gentlemen have lave span spent their time in elaborating a proposition which I shall not seek to controvert tr I admit that there is is a difre difference rence between a delegate and anti a member of congress and I shall endeavor to elio show w the application of the tile law in reference to this distinction mr air speaker this case cornea comes here pr precisely as every ever other election case conies canies and it should be treated in ill the same way it comes here under the law by ily the order of this house it was referred to the election committee that committee cittee has bas made a report let me say further farther to gentlemen on both sides that this case is is governed by tho the law and tile rules of evidence applicable to it precisely in the same way as any other election case applying the rules of law to tile facts in the tile case as I liopo hope to do it seems to mo me that no lawyer can blics imato for a it sin single le moment as to the right of mr annon cannon to a seat in tin this s house my aly friend here from Michi michigan gall emir mr horaj says sa s that lie docs does not propose to trouble his brain about tile constitution or the laws if it is only stated to him here or lie ile know knows that a it man presenting himself for admission is a that settles the whole question I with him without reference to the constitution ution or any thing else on the other liand hall my my friend from froin tennessee mr pettibone makes the admission that if mr call cannon should como come here as a representative from front a it state although covered all over with tile infamy of polygamy he lie would be bou bound to vote to admit him among us there is the difference between the tw two a gentlemen the gentleman fo from I in tennessee renn essee holds that he lie would bo be bound under tinder the constitution ion and laws to admit mr cannon if he presented himself as a representative senta tive from a state I say ay too that he would be bound to admit hi him till as polygamy is no disqualification under r the tile constitution and I b hope ap pp to show that the same rule tho the S same a law is just as obligatory upon this house with reference to tho the ri rights I IES I of f a delag delegate gate as the rights of a 11 11 member ember if I succeed in showing tills I hope that my friend from michigan Alic higan will reconsider the tile de declaration C la he lie lias has I hope too hastily made mad c I shall omit ornit much that I had intended to say because I do not desire to weary this hause I shall only discuss what I consider consid or the legal points that are involved in the case now I wadi to call the attention on of the tile house to tho fact that since the formation of this government at least binco since the tile caso case of james janics white in 1794 delegates have been seated on this floor and in the language 10 of madison in that case under the rules of tho the constitution and tho the jaws laws and as matter of a abi b solute right james madison then a member member of Cou congress gress and other distinguished men w alio ho had been in the tile convention that framed the constitution ution under w aich we now live all conceded although there was then no law of congress providing fo for r the admission of a territorial rit orial delegate that mr lr white had a right on oil this floor as much as member aber under tile ordinance any of 1787 passed prior to the a adoption of our prose present it and obligatory at that time upon the tile government tit by adoT adoption from the tile present mom moment ent that hat time to t whenever a it D delegate elegate has presented himself at the tile bar of this house hero there ha ila never r bee been a it question about the right to his aci it here rc ull der the hw and under lo ilia 10 const itu tion as muchas much a as a member iho the b books before me arc are full of cases absolute right of a the reco recognizing ll izing refer seat I will not delegate to a to these numerous cases which so fully rec recognize onize the right of a it delegate to his scat sent upon this floor and precedents arc are predicated upon tho the great fact of right the ab nb absolute right of adelea a delegate nate under tho the law to a seat under the present law relating to delegates from the territories it is provided that the people of tho the territories ri shall send delegates who shall have seats on oil this floor with tho the right to debate but not the right to vote this law was passed by this house and the senate and signed r b by tho executive it is absolute in it its operation it confers a r right ight which this tills house alono alo no cannot curtail or limit in any tiny way whatever as I think I shall be able to show allow me to eay further in this connection that under the operation of the jaw law it is provided in various statutes of tho tile I federal government that de delegates I c ga tes shall be treated p precisely re tile sumo same as members in reference to every right except that of voting it gives them the same alary they take the same oath the tile same law applies to both in ill reference to vacancies so on through tho the catalogue of the rights of members the law that gives a member the ri right I t to bo be seated hero here applies equally to a delegate from front a territory there is another proposition I v ish vish to call to tho tile attention of the tile house and I ask the tile consideration of the distinguished ch chairman nirman odthe of the committee on oil elections the gentleman C from front indiana mr ur calkins to this point when he becomes comes to tho the reply i in n the closing hour it is this congress C angress lias has passed a law by which the constitution and the laws of the united states so fur far as they are applicable shall appl apply to the territories that law ends binds as much as any statute made by congress rez s under tinder the constitution it fas has never been challenged till now no v and has been executed and practiced upon and especially as to qualifications for delegates for more mor than twenty five years it is important to bo be remembered in this connection that the constitution is is applicable to the territories so far as is it can be applied because as I think important consequences follow from that fact now I wish to call the attention odthe of the house for fora a moment to the proposition which harbec A iii adeby tho majority odthe of the committee in their report on this case to the house I think ali ink they have totally misstated as they have totally mistaken the law I can do it in a very few words the ground is boldly taken by the majority ofilio of tho committee that congress cannot make a law binding upon tho the next house as to the qualifications of delegates from territories I will refer to page of the report of my distinguished friend from indiana indian a mr ni calkins kins for the purpose of criticizing crit i it and to give him hima a cl chance ance to make an explanation ion of it when he lie comes to reply the fol following lowin are tit the exact words of the report lie holds that it is incompetent for congress COD gress and the executive to impose on any the right of delo gates ates to seats with defined qualifications that is to say Y when ilia several laws were passed giving tho tile territories ri the ri right I t to this tilis limited representation resen tation el those se laws were binding only on tile lower house which peri PC in fitted them to be or made it possible for them to bo be passed and were per only to the houses of future re congresses let us its analyze that here is a it distinct denial on the part of the in majority J i t that h at congress can call pass a law de defining lining any qualifications a member shall possess which shall bind the next house that is the distinct proposition ivsich is mado made here in other words althou gli C congress conr M in may ay p pass W a it valid and constitutional law fixing tho the qualifications of delag delegates ates of f territories rec requiring juhring ju iring that t they hey shall bd ba seven I of the united states rs a citizen yea years twenty five years old and inhabitants of the tife territories from W winch they come tin and d that if congress passes asses such a law as that it is is only binding binding upon the tile house so that passes it let Is to test st that and see CC where the tile logic of it ca carries aries us here is tho tile anti J polygamy bill ull passed this session which we no nearly arly all voted for I did reluctantly coll confess fes here is a it law that does fix the qualification of a it deler delegate bate it provides in in so of a it territory words that no delegate who many or cohabits with wi h is u a I polygamist hold more tha than 11 on one woman any office ce of profit or trust under tinder I should diketo like to tj tile government ask ic my f friend to explain ato to this house the tile effects of I this ills anti poleg b bill here is a law do deemin inn amy f the qualifications of a delegate al qu ilia the as ag precisely though ne negatively actively conati constitution t uti oil defines the qualifications and I of members negatively should liko like to ask ask my fily distinguished friend from India indiana ilat MR ga iio comes miles t to clo close se this tills kins kills when bae whether he calls to hotd say that for the SS law w hieb wo all shall providing t hat polygamist his sent among us only ftp take ey this con ress I a d alie ares pea to J house mouse iland and alint at tho the next 11 buze ent nt dit in tile next call disregard dis abat aud admit a yta it log 01 I ga f inist this report and bisbo i nl is th D I C a from front it and ial if there is DO es ape cape that u the law the anti polygamy bill is n farce and a failure that doctrine iii 19 a heresy in ill my humble judgment congress can prescribe qualifications as to the delegates and can bind the house by such qualifications it la is competent for congrow to fix the qualifications of delegates from the tile territories they not being members under the constitution and to eay say who avila shall and who shall not bo be a delc delegate ate and fix tho the qualifications and when congress has lins so said it is not only binding bindi ng upon this thi house sHouse but it is bindi binding it upon every house that succeeds talis this until such law is repealed that is the tile common sense of the thing and the law of the case and it cannot by any possibility lity be otherwise now my friend in hh his report goes on further to amplify his words as follows and with reference to the election of f delegates who if they hold any office or franchise at all can lc be nothing but agents representing ti alio property and common territory of all the branch people cople it operates only on the lower branch of congress for their election extends no right to them to interfere with the business of the senate or to act as members thereal now under tho constitution congress can make all needful rules and regulations in relation to the territories it has been decided that congress is the solo judge of this power ower if this is so why cannot ang congress r pass am a law if it deems it necessary ra refining Ne defining fining the qualification of delegates as necessary and proper for the tile regulation of the territories this right and power has never b before e f ore been questioned and when congress passes such a law it is binding on thi house and every branch of the government the view of the minority upon the tile question is this that this house can impose qualifications upon delegates it can fix limitations with reference legates and when the house hamade J the tile qualifications that il ay cobeen enado ad by the passage of Tien ap gendral cral law already re referred to jo providing viding that the constitution ution of the united states shall operate in all the territories so far as applicable that that act and by that law they did fix and establish qualifications and limitations and by that act they adopted the C constitution oil ution as a part of the statute law S suppose p ose they had bad put it in another fu form r suppose ar had in 11 iii form and tind had passed ed a statute adopting and restating the very language of the tile constitution giving a delegate the tile same qualifications that the constitution requires for in members embers of congro rc and that lie must possess these qualifications before lie could take his scat seat I would like to have my friends upon the other side say uli ether that would not be ft a valid law passed by congress abic and I binding upon this house until repealed by an in act let of congress what is the reason it would not but suppose we take the other view of the case and admit forthe for the sake of the argument that the constitution ution is inapplicable that it has no relevancy and docs does not apply to the case then what is the condition why we aro are placed in this condition that congress lias has passed n u law as I have already stated that the territories shall have the right to send delegates here to take their seats upon the tile floor now if they have not prescribed proscribed any qualifications for the delegates Delegate sand and the constitutional provision does not operate what standard do you fix Is the standard of qualification to b ed c wholly albitr arbitrary ary and at the caprice succeeding house now does not this follow as a logical conclusion from the premises that where you have fixed no qualifications no toll limitations i where you have lave not said wl who io shall or who shall not hold the seat or whether he be shall be white or black the people of the ter territories aro are judges ortho of the matter for themselves and select the person will whom om they desire to send here to represent their interests congress specifics no qualification then tile rights of tile people Is 03 to tile dalag delegate at are tire absolute and this ha has been tho the theory and practice for ninety year yean file people have the right to stand u upon pan the law they have jave the right to rely upon what is is nominated in in the bond what rule will you apply when they are give I I the right to have bava a seat here and con como a clothed with all of tho the power necessary t to occupy it it seems to me a that if if you take the ground that the constitution oil docs does not apply |