In the past 10 days the sad case of Utah’s Second District congressman, Allan T. Howe, has spun its wheels deeper in a quagmire .0f troubles. First,, -i ‘ ‘ ” gressman’s efforts., . ave a sex solici M charge dis -$ ‘3-=t F technicalities wen; I ( ‘ ‘ghe drain in Salt Lake; Court rulings. F ” ‘ T was convicted of as.? Q e by a city court ‘ ., gw a verdict he has t- T. i. . to Third District Lim t. And over the , , .., ” nd three of his re eection campaign aides resigned. In, addition, Utahls Democratic govemor and Mr. Howe’s two Democratic ,colleagues in Congress as wel! as the Salt Lake press have reiterated a belief that he should withdraw from the 1976 congressional race. This week the Weber County Democratic executive committee asked the party’s state central committee to call an emergency session to discuss withdrawing support for Howe’s reelection, saying his case is damaging the whole ticket. Despite these pressures, Rep. Howe has declared his determination to continue. seven if he should lose tbel appeal , This is no routine misdemeanor case because of Mr. Howe’s high office, the public trust involved, and the decision that must be made at the polls. It’s exceedingly difficult for Mr. Howe and his family – but it’s difficult for the public too, and embarrassing to the state. The presumption of innocence until proven otherwise is basic in our American system. On that presumption and Mr. Howe’s claim of innocence, his candidacy received a 3-2 vote of support at the state Democratic convention. Now, however, that “continued presumption” is being tested, largely because of Mr. I-lowe’s failure in city court to even offer a defense – call his own witnesses, testify himself, or offer a longexpected statement of his side of the issue. As this is written, no trial date has been set in district court. Oft-times court appeals move slowly. In Mr. Howe’s case precious weeks could could go by while the public waits. With the Nov. 2 election , creeping closer, it seems to u: Rep. Howe’s party and the public are entitled to (1) his immediate trial in district court no mtqtter what calendar juggling-gis required; and (2) assuranm of a full and fortbright Howe statement. There’s a limit on how long the public can be expected to wait for vital and satisfactory answers when an election is pending. If reassurance on Mr. Howe’s credibility and electability is not forthcoming, then he should indeed bow out as a candidate for reelection so ‘ another candidate can be chosen. Then, should further court appeals be necessary as he seeks to clear his name, he could pursue these without involving the party or the state. The public’s right must come first.