Columbia democrat and star of the north. [volume] (Bloomsburg, Pa.) 1866-1867, 1866-04-18
contested Seats in Congress.

Contested Seals Ii s~OnSEess'
No,hine more clearly marks the despe-
ration and disregard Of mora principle
cbsracieris,ic of the majority in Congress,
,ban the decisions made at the present ses-
sion upon questions of contested seats.
In the contested case between Baldwin
and .Trowbridge, Of Michigan, the House
came to decision in fat conflict with The
decision of the Sopreme Court Of that Safe
mon the riaht to vole under ls.con sli,uiior.
Even The Sopreme Court of The United
States holds itself bound 10 adopt the deci-
sions Of the highest court OF a Stale upon
all questions arising upon The Constitution
and laws Of the State, where they are not
In conflict with United States law. Yet the
radical majority in Congress boldly rePudi-
aled The law Of Michieanas pronouuced by
lis highest Court composed of Republican
iudees) in order TO admit a Rerubiican
mem5erio seal over Democrat.
Next. in the case OF Mr.. Voorhees,, of IN.
diana, the grossest partisan outrage was
committed. Mr. Voorhees, was returned
elected by majority Of i've OF six hundred,
and look bis seat ia the House. His sea.
was contested or the erouns that iraudu-
lent votes were returned for him in several
districts, and the contestant introduced
evidence 10 show that more votes were
given Tor him Che sconies:anD at some
of the polls than we're reported. Tae
evidence was far from satisfactory, bul The
Committee on Elections proceeded to SCI.
aside the reinrns, under The pTeience that
they were fraudulent Bat after deduc,ing
those returns, Mt Voorhees, siill lad ma
jorify. What then did he Committee do |!
Why proceed 10 count in the contestants
favor al the votes he had proved were given
him in the dispGseI districts, and thus
make mp a msjoriiy Tor him. No voles
were coo0,sd lor Voorhees, irom those dis
iricss for sas legal rc,urns we're shfown on,
o. rsiecsed, bus AL The votes that coaii be
scrs2ed o1s of he testimony were given
10 his nnsasoaisl, iAousA II vas vel kaown
and rndsaSsose thar hey ~sre Democratic
districts ard ahai Tooshees had actually re-
cesssd nsJ0risy of he leszl votes cast IN
lbem- Thus Al elected man was counted
our and defeated man "counted ih'' by
the Committee, and their rsPou was
sdoptea by the Republican House.
The more recent case OF Brooks and
Dodge from New York was equally out
rageous. Brooks was voted out and Dodge
voted in upon evidence which failed 10 sal
isfy many Republican members even Of
the House. But party demanded the sac
rifce of right and justice, aud they wsre
sacrificed.
Bnt The case Of Senator Stockton was
still more gross and scandalous. He was.
in fact expelled from tie Senate under pre-
,ence OF an undue election, in order 10 give
the radicals ia the Senate iwo-thirds vote
10 openuIe vetoes and pass CONSTITUTIONS al
amendments The Judiciary Committee
of the Senate (made up mostly OF Rspub-
iicans) reported with but ore dissenting
voiceihat be vas legally elected aud en-
filled % his sea-. Bot although eleven Re
publican Senator'S voted FOR him in the Sen
ate along with the Democrats, he was tprned
out and sent home by the radical majority.
And thus they obtained Just The required
two thirds vote TO ovennle the Presidents
veto Of the Civil Rights Bill. The iacls of
his election are simple, andslhe law of the
case very clear. The two Houses Of the
New Jersey Legislature met IN joilt Con-
veniion 10 eIeci a Senator and adopted rules
for their gosernment among which was
one that q. plurality of votes should be re-
quired 10 elect The vols was taken and
Mr.. Stockton receiving a plurality, was de-
clared elected. No objection or question
was made, his credentials were made out
and signed, aud in due time he took his
seat ir The Senate. Finally, as lhe pre-
tence for expelIine him, it was alleged that
the Joint Convention could not elect by
plnraiiig rule, although there was no law
of the United States or of New jersey 3rs
scribing any oiher Besides the Joint Con
vention 10. New Jersey had always made
their own rules, and Clearly had such au-
thority as an incident ci their power OF
election.
These election cases which we have no.
ticed, show the trne character of the Radi-
cal Republicans 10 a strong light They
are Dnscru2ulous, lawIess, Revolutionary
and destructive in heir whole policy, con-
duct and character
To-t no41-