The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1869-03-26

to drive ou. or smoke out the Acting Board OF Al
dermen. And yet Mr.. Corhn is no further advanced
than If he had gone to the courts al The act OF
the Legislature does not touch the validity Of the
votes, and the question s whether that act gives the
election to Pillsbury and his Aldermen, whether the
election was valid or invalid. and whether or not
they received the larcest number OF legal votes.
. his would be inconsistent with and repugnant 10
the city charter and violation of the constitution of
the { tate and the United States.
The bill violates the charter of the city; it is vic.
lation, not an amendment modification or repeal.
The citizens have the right to elect Mayor and A.!
dermep and yet the act gives those offices to certain
srecifed persons. The charter is not repealed. 1t
is recognized by the ordinances OF the convention
md by the municipal elections act, and the act to
quiet rights under military orders requires them to
hold Office until their successors are duly elected
aud qualified. Admit that the charter may be modi-
fed or repealed, ind it cannot be done without the
thirty days nc tee required hy the ctarler. The
first election bill, which was yetoe1, save this no.
tice, but the others do not. The Acting Mayor and
Aldermen are actually in possession, and the ques
ton whether the claimants were duly elected and
qualified can only be determined by the
right The pr,an BILE upon which it is based is OF
in accordance with the facts. 1t is garbling,
twisting of the truth. illsbury and his Aldermen
were declared to have received the largest number
of votes. but this can never be made to mean duly
elected 1t is also no law, because 1t deprves the
de Jacto officers of their rights under charter which
is not repealed and because itimposes punishment
penalty Under the form OF IN actionit attempts TO
punish them and deprive them Of their property
"without the judgment ofther peers or the law ofthe
land, which is not the declaration ofthe constitution
but OF Magma Charta 1t is also inconsistent with and
and repugnant to ITSELF in declaring valid what it
admits to be invalid These violations o. common
rig hts and in themselves mafe the act void and of
no effect
The validating act" moreover is special or class
legislation. Its repeal oil military orders and the
penalty for non.vacatipg Office on demand are not
universal in their application. but confined to the
Acting Mayor and Aldermen. 1t subjects them to
restrictions not imposed upon any other persons, it
enacts special penalties, it gives Mr.. Pi!lsbury
OF action against Mr.. Clark, it is retroactive
and prospective in its operation, it despos the Act
ng Mayor and Aldermen Of their ofdces-their prop
perty-aud their franchises, without the judgment of
their peers and for al these reasons it is unconsti
tutional and void. The question Of the legality of
the election s clearly judicial, and the is made
up aud pending in the Supreme Court, for aulhori-
ties in the State show that cannot be discon-
tnued except Ly on order of court. The case is
still pending and the city cannot Re cut off from its
right to judicial cison by an act Of the Legisa-
ture. Noact declaring that to be legal which is be-
ore the court Us being illegal be law at all
law cannot be made to deny to certain persons the
benefit of the gene raj law in particular cases. The
Legislature has no light to determine the facts Of
fecting tile rights of individuals and when they go
beyond their province their acts are void.
It bsing o'cIork Judge Carpenter adjourned the
further hearing Of the to Monday next, at 10 A,
NJ, when Mr.. Miles will close his cogent and able
argument.