The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1869-03-31

e That il is contrary to the Fourteenth Constitutional
Amendment. he Validating bill did not infringe any
privileges or immunitios. because those derived
from corporation were not privileges or immuni-
ties in the Of the constitution, and have been
80 decided over and over again. It was not design
ed to tic up The hands of the Legislature, and he,
Mr.. Corhin thought that the bare statement of the
facts was sufficient to prove that it had such in
tenton or purpose
Mr.. Corhin then said that immemorial usage had
justified such on usage OF power as that OF the Vaida-
ting act The charter Of the city was in the hands
of the Legislature. aud had been frequently amend
ed. The State had many years ago conHi med an &C.
ion of Council which the courts had declared void
and, although one did object, the law would have
been void If it had been unconstitutional. The
more want OF objection had nothing to do with that
case, or with the Timmonsvile AID Moultreville
election cases. If there was MY difference in the
cases, it was In favor of The Validating act.
IN regard to the objection made that there vas 5
case eeuding he said that there was statute grant
ing judgment where case had been discontinued
TO tho public detrment and under that the counsel
could, doubtless get their costs. Now. the clerk Of
the Supreme Court cartifes that the original quo
warranto was discontinued IN opcn court. This
presumes that it was done with the consent of court
ard could not be contested nor could the record pc
contradlcted The certificate that the discontlnu-
ance is of record puts an end to the question.
Mr. Corbin sIid that the case was almost without q
parallel Nc one usually refuses to obey the decree
of the Supreme court declaring certain persons
elected. 1he usual form was to admit them and try
them and their tile by quo ~arrano. and the con-
duct of the Bosr1 Of aldermen in refusing to sur
render was q precedent dangerous to the peace and
security of the community. Suppose that at the
election for Governor in 1s7O the court to promul-
gate tho election, consisting of the present officers,
should decl re the election void. Would not this
lead to bloodshee anarchy and c1nfus on7 The Gov
ernor eect should be admitted, aud the legality ofhs
election tried af erwlrds This was case in which
he felt that he might urge the court to make speedy
desision. The public interests at stake, the party
feeling and the passions of the hour al require for
this case speedy solution. All rests with the court
We said Mr. corbin, are here to claim our rights.
We do not appeal TO passion or feeling, but look at
the case as legal question 10 be decided between
the rarties This we submit to the court. We do
not want the TO hang along, butto be determin-
ed forthwith. And know that when the decision
is once rea he'd In the pure and calm atmosphere OF
the courts, it would CONNIE. itself TO the calm judg
ment Of the community and all would acqulesce in
it. But until he right Is determined 'hero can be
no confidence and no protection; no confidence in
the officers of The city. who would have but slight
hold upon the people and no protection or vndica-
ton OF The right. We ask your decision In tho
name of the dearest rights that the people have.
Mr. Porter arose and asked leave 10 say that he
and his associates had been taken completely by sur-
prise by the assump ion OF the part of AR corbin
that the Supreme Court, in the mandamss case, had
adjudged the validity Of the election. Upon this
the whole case turned and he contended that the
court had carefully excluded tho question OF fact
from ther decision, be would beg to read the deci-
sion to show that there was some foundation for
what he said.
Mr. Porter read the decision referred to. aud the
case closed, the decision of the s3urt being re-
served