, 1869-08-20
al EfIor,t 70 sustaln Ffaud.

An Effort TO sustain Frauus
4. n Is said that great effort is being made to
have Indiana counted as one of the States rati~
fyiue the Fifteenth Amendment. 1t is truly sur-
nrsing that men of cbaSacter, protesting respect
for Constitutions and laws, should be willing to
favor the cosummation of q fraud so wicked and
paIable. The Constitution of the State Of In-
diana declares two thirds the members ofeach
of the two Houses necessary to constitute a
quorum to transact business, and that without
a quorum the respective Houses can only adjourn
from time to time aud send for aosentees. In
Indiana, before either branch acted on the
amendment proposed to be ratified, number
more than sufficient to leave both without a
quorum had actually resigned their seats ; in the
Senate, seventeen, we believe, but are not cer>
tain, 10 the House, fo-ty>six so that there was
no absentees to be sent for. The radicals re-
cognizing the fact that neither House could
transact business without quorum adjourned,
and the Governor issued proclamation to till
the vacancies created in the two Houses oy resig-
nations. -r
The special elections ordered By the Governor
were held, and every one of tie Senators and
members who had resigned were Reelected, thus
onelusively proving that the people Of that
State are opposed to negro suffrage and the rats
6cation of the Fifteenth Amendment. This Ac~
tion OF the radicals in declioing to act on the
Fifteenth Amendment proves that they did net
believe that either House, without quorum,
could legally do any act, except to adjourn from
day TO day and send for abssnteeS.
After the newly elected members bad taken
their seats and taken the requisite oath, the two
Houses postponed the Fifteenth Amendment 70 q
day certain. On the day fixed for additional aeN
tion, the democratic members in both Housss
again resigned, leaving both Houses second
time without q quorum TO transact business.
With knowledge of this fact, for it was on the
floor brought TO the notice the radicals in both
Houses, they deliberately voted on the Fifteenth
Amendment and declared it ratified. Aud this
clear and palable fraud the radical leaders In
Indiana are eudeayOring in good earnest to have
consummated.
The conduct of the democrats who resigned il
justified and sustained as correct, because th'
object had in view was the submission OF the
amendment to 9 vote Of the people, very large
majority of whom were known to be opposed to
its ratification. We say it was but tait and just
to consult the people on q question Of so much
importance to them, and the matter would have
been submitted for their approval, if the rAdica
| leaders had not known that q large majority o
the people were opposed to Its ratification. To
sustain this monstrous fraud, a precedent ii
pointed to, but which is in no respect analogous
The Bright and Fitch case is different in every
respect 10 that case two United States Senators
| but in Joint convention OF the two Houses. The
House passed a resolution fixing the time and
place for the meeting of the two Houses in join
convention, for the election of two Senators
This resolution, the Senate, influenced solely
by party considerations, refused to concur in
So the matter rested until it became necessary
| for tse two Houses to meet in joint convention
to eject officers for several State institutions
| The Joint convention assembled with the Lieut.
enAnt Governor, as President Of the Senate, il
the chair. After having elected the officers t
be then chosen, the joint convention was ad
CURED to meet at the call of the presiding Off Ger
A short time thereafter the two Houses agair
assembled in joint convention, on the call OF th'
proper officer, and largely overa quorum of eacl
Of the Houses being in attendance, as shown b!
the roll call, a resolution was offered and passet
to proceed to the election of two United State
Senators. During the time the vote of the join
convention was being taken, q number of Sena
tors protested and left the convention. AS th
existing law on the subject provided for th
election of United States Senators in joint con
venton of the two Houses, the convention wheI
assembled had a clear right to elect-to adjourn
| to another day or hour, or sine die. The conven
tion had assembled under a resolution passed b,
both Houses, was legally in session, as due motto
| bad been given of time, and place of meeting
| No member OF either body had previously re
signed, and it was not at the time the conven
Non proceeded to business claimed that the con
Yvention was not full. In fact, at the commence
mens of proceedings 10 convention there was bu
>few absentees.
The Senators eleeteds sMessrs Bright and Fitcl
we're declared legally chosen, by the Judiciar.
Committee of the Senate, and by large major
| ity of the United States Senate were declared
legally elected, aud the Secretary of that bod.
was instructed to administer the usual oath
The cases cited, we maintain are not, in any re
spect, analogous. In the case of the Senators
the two Houses met in joint convention under
resolution passed previously by both. As TO th'
ratification resolution, it had to be passed Stpdr
dLeiy by both Houses-both with suthcien
number present to constitute constitutional
quorum. The proofs conclusive that there wal
not a quorum present in either House at the tint
the ratification resolution was declared passed
It is, therefore, clear that the proceedings arr
illegal, fraudulent, and should be so pronounced
| by the proper authorities of the Government
Sacramento Reporter.