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

following emorial was very largely signed yestcr-
day. and will be for signatures IN The NEWS Office
this morning:
To the Hen -abtc the Senate rad The House Of Repre-
sentatiues of the State of South Carolina:
The memorial of the undersigned, citizens of tho
City of Charleston, in said State. respectfully
sheweth:
That your memorialists have observed with regret,
that bill has been intl cduccd in boi branches Of
tho Legislature to make valid the election Of 10Th of
November. 1868. for MAYOR and Aldermen OF the
City of Charleston.
Your memoiaists, therefore, ost respectfully
submit for tie consideration Of your honorable
lody the following rc1sons why the bill herein re-
1errcd to, mould not become law:
1st b, cause ibc Acting Mayor and Aldermen Of
the i.y of Charleston, The tribunal constituted By
your honorable body to investigate such cases OF
contested cction have afe- hearing both slider Of
the question, solemnly declared that they hold and
believe that said election c-al, ard on that ac-
count they withhold certificates of election from the
persons named in the bill
2d. Because the .ubject-nattcr of the bill refer
rcd 10 is properly Judicial question, and its merits
can only be ascertained by judicial Investigation
Cd, Because the matter is now before the supre re
Court of the State carried thore by the ccurss for
the c'aimants,. tribunal Of competent jurisdiction
Gated under the constitution, aud composed Of
Judges chosen to their high office by your honorable
body aud for the Legislature to interfere with tho
functions Of coordinate branch of the Stl'e gov
ernment, would establish dangerous precedent
which might hereafter be followed by future Lesis-
latures, and be calculated not only to degrade tho
judiciary by doprvius II Of its legitimate jurisdc
ton over questions oflaw. hut tcad also 10 invade
the right Of the people 10 elect their own rulers.
4th, Pec7use from the nature OF the case, 1t
would be impossible for the Legislature to hear and
understand both sides of tho question, and The pas
sage of the proposed bill could not but be regarded
as an ex parte law affecting most injuricusly the
rishts, liberties and property ofa large number Of
the constituents of your honorable body.
Your memorialists affirm, without fear of sscccsE-
full contradiction, that they are law-abiding people,
and that had they repson to believe that Gilbert
Pilsbury and the persons named as Aldermen IN
sa;d bill had received majority of the legal votes
for Mayor and Aldermen, cast in said election, they
weud have acquiesced in the choice Of tho people,
would have done all within their power to uphold
and support the City Council so chosen 1t ls only,
therefore, from a firm b,liAf that the Claimants
named in said bill were not the choice Of majority
.ho legal vo:ers who voted at said election and are
therefore no: entitled to their soats; and that thr
proof OF tLis will be made out on the investigation OF
the caso before Judicial tribunal, that our memo
ria,s;s have objected and do.objecs, to dir. Piiis-
bury and the persons named as Aldermen in said
bill eeins installed as Mayor una Ai1ermen OF the
City OF Charleston.
For these, among many other reasons which
might be adduoed, your mcmorialists huub!y pray
your Lonorably body to reject ihs bill now before
the Legislature proposing 10 make valid the recon
election for Mayor and Aldermen Of the Ci , oil
Charleston ard to allow the case to remain jcct
to the jurisdiction OF the courts Of the State, where
it legtimates belongs and to tue decision OF which
your remorialists will most oao rtully submit.
And your memoriasts will ever play, and so forth.
Charleston, February l, 1867.