The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1869-02-11

|
range themselves. However, will base my
reasons for the objections shall offer to the
6ili, on the majority report, and the act OF the
General Assembly under which the election
was held. [The speaker here read from the
act, section five.1 That says tho candidates
receiving the largest number of legal votes
shall be declared duly elected. Now the act Of
the General Assembly, expressly says the
votes shall be legal. The officers named in
the act are tho judges az to whether
the votes are legal. If upon examine
the Parties elected have the right to en-
ter upon and exercise the functions of the
office to which they were elected. and not be.
fore. Now, by the, act, the Acting Board of
and they have said there were no legal votes
cast. When they made their return to the
writ OF nedndanus, to the Supreme Court they
SAID according to the count, Gilbert Pillsbury
| had a majority of votes, but that majority were
illegal votes, and honce they sad the election
was invalid. That Was their answer. Upon this
point hinges the whole case, thai is. as to the
legality OF the votes cast. When it shall be
proved that the votes cast were legal, then
shall DO prepared, as quick as any man, to as
sert the tact and the right Of these gentlcmen
to take their seats.
1t is required by law that these gentlemen
| shall be legally elected. [ know gcntlomcn
here differ on these questions with myself. 1t
is proposed BY this bill to confrm what the
COMMITTEES admit in their report to be frauds
| Do they really desire the Senate to confirm
frauds2 They have also stated that the ques-
ton can go before the courts and the claim
ants receive justice, but they tell Us time
wings it's way too slowly to meet their wants
| and accomplish their purposes. Hcnce they
| want the Legislature in it's sovereign capacity
| to come hero and confirm frauds.
| Tho gentleman from Marion asserted that
| five hundred men wero driven from the polls
| or not allowed to exercise their rights. II so,
| there must have been some force or some
| power to drive them away, otherwise they
e stald away va themselves: II it be true that they
were locked up IN mills, then there is every
reason why they should have another election
| to let them out of the mill.
Again, he says frauds were committed by
tho Democratic party. If there were frauds
| committed by either party, then, as an honest
man. want all honest expression Of the will
of the people. I believe the best way for par
ties to succeed is to succeed uEon the 1mmor-
| tai principles OF justice and equity. II has
been said that this protest was put in after all
the returns were made. [ Will state that the
| nominee of the other side made no protest,
and that it vas entered by sundry citizens 1
am prepared to prove that the protest came in
when returns from seven wards only had been
received. So that the statement that the pro-
test was entered only after all t1e returns
were in Is not proved by the evidence.
Another point. The report goes on to say
theN conducted the election in good faith, but
admits that the oath was not administered.
What right had they to enter into an election
without all parties taking the prescribed OATH
when ono section Of the law says they shall be
sworn II tho managers, OF voters were not
sworn, they violated the law. Yet they como
here and ask us to validate lie-to make per
manont, strong and valid q violation Of the act
passed by the General Assembly. never can
and never will give M, voice or vote for such
proceedings. When the law Is specific and
clear, it is the duty Of every man t. carry out
hat law, to perform his duty according to law.
Ii he violates it one jot or title, he violates
! wss done without any wrong intent That was
written by learned men in the law, attorneys
and United States attorneys at that.
have nothing TO say as to the fairness of
that election 1 was there. I know too much
| of this election. I was down by the City Hall
and l witnessed q good part OF it. But the
committee say the Acting Board of Aldermen
had no right to declare the election void.
would like to know now you can legalize frauds
unless you can make right wrong and wrong
right. The managers and the committee say
1t was lair election, yet those persons did not
take the prescribed oath. 1t not, could they
not have committed any amount ct frauds?
This committee themselves have acknowledged
it to be wrong and they know by virtue Of the
fraud committed the election was null and
void.
I do not believe that when this bill passes,
as have no doubt you will pass it, it will effect
it's purpose. Iknow in taking tho position do
shal! be branded as deserer from my party;
shall be charged with having sold out and
gone over to the Democratic Parry; that am
with the Democrats cheek by jowl. I know it
will be said that have received money, per-
haps thousand dollars, for my speech IN de-
fence. But, whatever may be said. T will not
shrink from doing what deem my indispen-
sable duty to those I represent, wh,to and
colored. believe the bill calculated to do
more harm than good. It Las boon asserted
that If this bill does not pass it will be re-
garded as Democratic victory.
But who are the men you desire to oust
There are but three known Democrats in that
Board OF Aldermen. All the rest are Republi-
cans, and, what is more, seven or nine were
elected at the recent election. But as honest
men they were compelled, after a ]ongthy ex-
animation. to declare upon their oath that the
election was illegal. No man will presume to
doubt the Republicansm Of Mr.. Robt. Howard,
MIR. Richard Dereef, Mr.. Potter, or Mr.. Ged-
dings. Mr.. Wall, and other gentlemen on that
board, who have pronounced the election null
and void. Seven of those Aldermen, as have
said, are elected, and they were appointed
under General Cunby's order. Would they, if
not compelled by the evidence, make declara-
ton which puts themselves out Of Office? If
they were not conscientious men would they
declare the election null -? The present in
cumbents in office hold their positions
to some extent under the ronure-of-ofice bill
passed at tho last session. They were appoint
ed UNDER the Reconstructlon acts, which say
they shall hold Office uutil the machinery of
civil government IS in operation, and some
persons are properly elected to take their Of
hces. l holi that Mr.. Clark and the pro. ent
their successors arc duly anu regularly quail
lied by the law. lnasmuch as the Legislature
have made it the duty Of tho Mayor and Alder
mon to declare the election, say there is no |
power TO oust these men out of tier Offices
until they have declared their successors duly
qualified. Until q fair unbiased election il
hell, and legal declaration made By the pro-
per authority care not how many tickets YOU
approve, MIR. Clark can hold his Office underline
Reconstruction acts until it is decided that
his successor has been legally elece ed Iknow
the argume@t is that the Reconstruction acts
have ceased. They have ceased only as far as
they have done so, legally claim, MIR. CLARK
has not been superseded legally and un IL the
election has been declared legal AID gu!ar,
power cannot get into that Office.
!. In the return to the nsandan.us it is said.
hir. Pillsbury received tho highest number of
votes cast, but it is also Said those votes were
not legal.
know the learned counsel has told us the
courts have decided that question. but il re-
member rightly, the court said that the claims |
OF MIR. Pillsbury were not before it. It was
simnlY that the ansWar should lie 10 anaxuor