Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1856-03-27

rule the House should be guided by IN Its
attempt to investigate the case; it is in. re-
ality question ofsubstance; because on the
rule which you adopt in the investigation Of
the case will depend important consequent
ces, whether we adopt the rules laid down
by the act of 1851 or by the parliamentary
precedents. Either standard of investiga-
tion will limit the range of enquiry.
What does the act of 1851 prescribe? ? The
act of 1851 is, it occurs to me, an act found
cd in eminent wisdom-an act which will
stand the closest scrutiny. That act pro-
vides, in the first place. that the contcstant
shall "spcciN particularly the grounds up
on which he relies in the contest" Why
does it say "specify particularly?' Be-
cause Congress understood the evil effects
which would arise from allowing these mat
ters to be based upon general objections; and
like every other court called upon to inves-
tigate subject, Congress required the mat
ter to be stated specifically, so that it could
proceed understandingly. Again: The act
further goes on and requires the person claim
ing the scat, in his answer to the contestants
protest, if he affirm any new facts to state
them "spccifcally." The result is, then,
that by these two provisions of the act, the
pleadings are made specific and the parties
brought to issue. They do not, then, come
here at large, disputing everything, but a
few points are developed for cxamination.-
And the House can understand the impor-
tancc of this rule at once, because it is obvi-
Gus that the Committee of Elections ale IA.
cilitatcd in their investigations when the is
sue is clearly made; otherwise, it would be
an endless task. If the contestant had the
right allowed him to plead at large, the Com
mittce of Elections would never be able to
get through the examination of objections
made without defntcncss or specification.
The act further goes on, and provides how
evidence is to be taken. 1t provides means
for the examination of witnesses, and pro-
vidcs certain time within which witnesses
are to be examined, leaving it to the discrc-
ton of the House to extend that time. These
are the leading provisions of the act of 1881;
and it seems to me that it would be great
blunder in this House TO depart from the prin-
ciples of that act. 1t seems to me that though
this act is not, in the present case, technical
ly binding on this House, as it speaks only
of members of this IIouse-not meaning
Delegates in a strict scnse-yet it would be
unwise in this House to depart from the
rules and principles and mode of investiga-
ton pointed out by it.
So much then on this point. There arc
other general features in the case, to which
7 would invite the attention of the House,
because upon them depends, again, the ex-
tent of the investigation. What is the office
of Delegate of Territory? The delegate
ship of Territory is legal Office. 1t is
not an Office which has arisen by custom or
by the sanction of this House alone. It's an
office which has arisen by force of the su-
prcme law Of the United States governing
the subject. In England the king cannot
originate new Office with fees This House
cannot originate 4 new general office, with or
withoutfees. The office ofDelcgate from Kan
ses is legal office. The particular office Of
territorial Delegates originated with the Or
dinance of 1857, and the ordinance was car
ried into effect in that particular by the act
of Congress of 1850. By that ordinance it
was provided that whenever the Northwest
ern Territory had a population of five thous-
and white male inhabitants, it should be en-
titled to = Delegate in Congress, and since
that time Delegates have been assigned to
the various Territories by act of Congress-
In this particular case the office of Delegate
from Kansas has been created by the Kan
sas-Ncbraska BILL The office is 4 creation
of that act. 1t docs not arise by the mere
will of this House, but by the will of all the
departments ofthe Government. That [ take
10 be beyond all dispute.
Again: the Kansas Nebraska act, giving
origin to this Office, has defined how this
officer shall be chosen. That question has
an important bearing upon this case, because
that, / take it, excludes all prctence of Mr..
Rccjcr to 4 seat, and all questions which
might be raised in that connection. The
act of Kansas and Nebraska says on this sub
jcct, that 4 Delegate shall be elected by the
people Of the Territory of Kansas. How:
1t assigns to the people of the Territory a
right to be represented in Congress by a Dele
gate. But how arc they to exercise that
right? The Delegate is to be chosen by the
will of the people. But how is their will to
be manifested? Their will is to be manifest
ed under the law-unlera pre-existing law,
not vagrant wandering, irregular liccnti-
Gus will, but will to be exercised under the
forms of the law, under the regulation of the
ballot-box, carried out at a particular time
and under specified forms. That is the OH
! ly way, under tho KanSas-Nebraska act, by
which the Office Of Delegate of Kansas arises
That is the only way in which the Office is
created, by force of the public will Of Kan
sas speaking under the law.
Congress in inserting that principle in the
Kansas bill has not done anything new. 1t
has only implanted in that bill great -imc-
rcan principlc-that principle which has
existed throughout all Of our history, and on
which our institutions rcst--thc principle
that the public voice and the public will are
to be obcyed and respected, under the forms
of law-thc principle that the people are
everything while they speak under the law,