The Caucasian. [volume] (Alexandria, La.) 1874-1875, 1874-04-18
The case was appealed to the su-

The case was appealed to the su.
preme court, and the supreme
court held that no judicial tribunal
in that State had authority to in.
quire into the fact of an election,
but that the canvass by the board
and the commission of the governor
were conclusive. So they reversed
the Judgment, and conferred the
Office upon the candidate proved
to have received. the fewest votes.
Now, the Senator from Indiana
maintains that when the Senate,
pursuing the line Of it's constitu-
tional duty, reaches the question
whether Kellogg and his associates
are the legal State officers and bis
legislature has been duly elected,
we are estopped, because the su-
preme court of Louisiana has set
tied that they are; although that
that court themselves declare they
have no Jurisdiction to determine
that question. The determination
Of court having no jurisdiction to
inquire is made conclusive npon an
inquiry as to which the Constitu-
ton makes us the exclusive Judges.
This is one of the healthy legal
propositions which the Senator
from Indiania is driven to main
tain.
Mr.. MoDToN.-Does the Senator
think now that he states the case
fully !?
Mr.. CARPENTER.-I know 1
state it as fully as is necessary to
the decision OF this question.
Mr.. MORTON. The supreme court
of Louisiana in that case decided
that they could not go into the
Question as to who was elected,
because there was another tribunal
created by the law to determine
that question: special tribunal
created by the laws Of Louisiana
for that purpose, and they are
bolind by the decision of that
tribunal That tribunal is the re-
turning board. But they do not
decide who constitute the return
ing board, and when they have
decided that they say they cannot
go behind the decision of that re-
turning board, because the jurisdic-
ton is conferred upon that board to
make the returns. That is all of
it.
Mr.. CARPENTER. And that is
q good deal more than there is of
it, too. Then the revised position
Of the Senator is this: We set ont
here to inquire as to the existence
Of certain officers; we are estopped
in that inquiry because the su-
Spreme court Of the State have set
tied it; and now he says that the
supreme court have said they had
no jurisdiction to inquire into 1t be-
canse some other tribunal had.
Well, I DO not care what is the
reason that tie supreme court can
not inquire into it; al that it is
necessary for me to make out in
order to show that their decision
cannot bind us, is that tho court
making the decision iad no juris-
diction to inquire into tho facts.
If the Senator chooses to rest that
want of power to inquire upon one
ground instead Of ANOTHER, it is all
the same to me-; but still / main
tain that we cannot be bound by
the decision of a court of jurisdic-
ton to inquire into the question
which we mnst decide.
Mr.. MORTON. They had juris-
diction to decide which was the.
board, and did decide it.
Mr.. CARPENTER. They had juris-
diction to repeat, parrot-lilze, as the
Senator has none after them; and
SO all these questions, from the
right Of d Senator of the United
States down to the right Of every
parish officer in Louisiana, are to
be settled by a false return, proved
false in every court that has ever
investigated it; known to be false
by every man who has ever examin-
ed it: proved false by the very
met who made 1t, and known b.
the Senator himself to be an un-
PARALLEL fraud and that false can
vass has estopped the State courts,
us, and everything is CON
Guided by a fraud which is confes-
sed on all hands and laid bare by
an investigation f a committee Of
this body.