The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1869-02-08
The Debate on the Charleston Election
Bill.

cOusluerdtlOu OI Inc OnarleSLOn CleCtlOn
bill to Tuesday next, developed the fact
that strenuous attempt is being made to
pass the bill as strictly party measure,
without regard to its constitutionality, JUS
tice or propriety.
Mr. Corbin wanted to know "whether
"the law is to be enforced" THE question
which the State is now asking of the Leg
islsture; and he also wanted to know
whether "money influence and big names
"are to rule, contrary to principle, law
':and JUSTICE" while the State asks of
the Legislature whether ''party is TO rule,
contrary to law, justice and the State Con-
':stitution ?" Mr.. Corbin declared that he
could show that the bill was "wise, Just
illegal and right" This he may be able to
do in the Senate chamber; but this he can
not do in any court, or before any tribunal
in the State, where argument may be met
by argument, precedent by precedent, and
simple assertion by the irrefutable logic of
facts.
But the speakers who preceded Mr.. Cor
bin did not confne themselves TO declaring
that the law was meet and just, and, there
fore, should be passed. Mr.. Allen told the
Senate that they might postpone the bill if
they were willing TO be tramplcd upon by
the Acting Board of Aldermen, and called
upon them, if they intended to assert their
rights as legislators, 10 act upon the bill at
once. As far as we know, the Acting Board
of Aldermen is composed of inoffcnsive
men who desire to trample upon no one,
and least of all 10 wound the sensitive feel
ings Of worthy brother Republican. They
did but perform the duty which the law of
1868 devolvcd upon them. They decided that
there had been no legal Municipal election
in this city. They did not declare, contra
ry to law and evidence, that Pillsbury and
his Board were duly elected. This is the
head and front of their offending. And
what the rights of the Senate, q legislative
body, have to do with judicial question:
question which has been before the courts
and which is confessedly kept out Of the
courts at this mamen. by the friends Of Mr..
Pilsbury, because learned judge cannot
hear and determine grave question as
quickly as senators may vote when they hear
the crack of the party whip Allen
did not venture to explain. Grt whatever
may be the thoughts of certain senator's,
the people know that, in the words of Mon
tesquieu, ''thero can be no liberty if the
0power of judging be not separated from
''the legislative and executive powers.
They know that "were the power of judg-
"ing joined with the legislative, the life
sand liberty of the subject would be e1-
'posed to arbitrary control; for the Judge
"would then be the legislator" And the
Senate will remember that their actions
cannot be hidden from the broad light of
day. They and their pretended laws will
be arraigned at the bar of public opinion,
and this question of the rights of the Sen
ate, as opposed to the rights of the people,
be tried by the test of the Constitution of
the State, by the law of the land, by an au-
thority superior to any which even Mr.
Allen and his colleagues possess. Nor will
this be done out of opposition to Mr.. Pills
bury alone. The issue now is not between
Mr. Clark or Mr.. Pillsbury; it is whether
the Legislature of the State is to accunu-
late all powers-lcgislative, executive and
judicial-in tho same hands--an accumula-
tion which may justly be pronounced "the
every defuition of tyranny"
Mr.. Allen, in the course of his speech,
also asked whether the lawyers and press
of Charleston aud the Democrats of that
city did not '.declare in advance that they |
s.would not abide by the election if Dir.
was succcssful?" Our reply is
that such o declaration was not made by
either the lawyers, the Democrats or the
press of Charleston, but that declaration
was made, as it is made now, that they |
would and will abide by the results of O
legal election AID the decisions of the courts
of the State, whatever those results may
be. Beyond this they will not 60.
Beverly Nash, the colored senator from
Richland, followed Mr.. Allen, and said en-
phatically that he was not willing to leave
'ahe rights of the citizens of the State (i.e
'Pillsbury) to the courts, judges, or any
"parlicuar individual" and that the mat
ter should be settled "without any regard
'to the Supreme Court, District Court, or
''any other court" Also, that if Pillsbury
and his Aldermen were elected, as was
shown by the highest number of votes, he
wanted them "put into Office, if it required
'qhe Governor to call out the whole force
''of the State for that purpose" And also
and this is the keynote of the whole de-
bate-s'this matter is the life of the party,
'the Republican party in Charleston. 1t
'depends upon it." He was in favor of the
bill, not only because he believed it to be
rigat, but als0 cas- party measure"
The threat cf calling out the whole force
of the State to install Mr. Pillsbury will
=, -