Keowee courier. [volume] (Pickens Court House, S.C.) 1849-current, 1860-01-28
The Contest for Sneaker.

y \-Itl tlni,l
n Sncokcr with an rprr,,,,;sioc. ,,.o,,,o,. g..
s,,ool, oIoo.;. nv, '0' "
l' nc ''"'N 'cPup"c"uS ihSlSI
upon the adoption "t resolution declaring that
u plurality vote shall elect, which course would
secure Che election of thoir C,vor;to S,,n
~, g .l, , V '''
'"''0'" u" 0"'"''' Vi Oo''o'csS nave uetef>
mined to resist this measure with all the means
in 'hcr power. This we arc glad to know. and
believe that thnir nstituorts ,,.;,I s,t; .,
ppop;no,.Ir :, ol,,,,;, .,,., y,
~ " ""'P'''S '"0'' r" COURSE MI
-hlhhS' ol NharieStoh mas spoken on the sub
Jcct, and we copy his remarks from the Gl0Je !.
Mn. Miles. | thank my friend from Virgin
in for Welding to me. | certainly woull not
have intcrruptcd this discussionHwhirh wos
strictly speak;n,r n discussion of y nn;nt of "r'
der--had it not been for the remarks In st made
by the gentleman from Maine os 70 tho cnnet.-
tntonajty of the plurality rule. Now. MS the
gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. pennin~tonl
commented npon some remarks which in1 fnli
the other day npon the subject. | desired to 70
ply to him. and understood the gentleman very
courtcouSly to indicate that he was willing t.
yield t. me for that purpose; but in the moan
time the point of order was made which took
precedence over everything else and MS LONG MS
the discussion was confined strictly to that. |
was willing to keep silent. But now as anoth-
er question has been brought up-prematurely
said the other day that in my Judgment,
the plurality rule was unconstitutional be-
cause the Constitution, providing for the orGnn-
ization of the House, merely says " the House
shall chose" means certainly the majority of
the House. 1t certainly cannot mean Il portion
OF the House, but, while it means a majority
of the House, and cannot therefore mean but
a portion of the House, it cannot, on the other
| hand, he argued by any fair Implication, that it
should bc the whole House unanimously, as the
gentleman from New Jersey put it, The House
| certainly means, therefore. n majority of the
members of the Honse assembled on the floor.
Now, do not wish to go into any extended
remarks. | have only therefore, this to say -:
that this Interpretation is supported by the al
most unanimous usage of Congress- and that
whenever Speaker has been elected by the
plurality rule, itbccamc necessary to adopt that
rule by special vote. Is not, therefore, obvi.
GUS that, in adopting that rule in advance of
going into an election we are prescribing in ad.
vance different law by which an election is to
be governed? Suppose that the plurality rule
is adopted; and suppose that an election of
not perfectlv we'll known tp oycrT anntIcm,n
here that that would not constitute n valid rnn.
stitutionaI election of Sncokcr2 Whv nnt9-.
Because Immediately olior tho n,o.t;nD .,ni ho
fore he could exercise onv of the fnnct;nns of
Speaker. there must be n resolution nnssed bv n
majority of the House declaring the election yn
lid and legal Let me ask gentlemen. os G,ir
minded men, whether thew think that indirrc
ton like this is not, in common variance,
whipping the devil round the p" And
how can any CONSCIENTIOUS man vote against
o"U "'aas RUE ON ,he ground th"' II !" not
uo'I,t ''iu Wv, "''I' "H'""' No,o lor "
mia cnDs,i,,tti u,'1 I e,IS'" ~ u'iacr t,'a'
,'ont mt tt, ""N iH"' 10 MY ar
F Let me- now ["T oniy % in conclusion GOV thor no.
eyng as dn hsnns5v IVI''o' onI S"$ ',i",, pr'