National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1875-02-12
What evidence had he that the bonds had

and distinctly made in the argument Of
Judge Mcclure, and he asserts emphati
cally that there is no evidence of the &C.
ceptance. The OnUs of showing an accep
lance of the Office was on the friends of the
Garland government. We understand that
the Brooks party put Baxter's proclama
ton in evidence for the purpose of showing,
| as it does show, that the only ground Of
ordering new election was that certain
members of the Legislature had "been ap,
pointed to Office" Having done this, they
showed the grounds on which the Governor
acted in ordering a new election. If the
grounds assigned by the Governor in his
proclamation were not sufficient to sustain
his action, and additional testimony was
required for this purpose, we submit that
this evidence should have been furnished
by the friends of the Garland government.
1t was not furnished, and when Judge
Poland states that ''no question was made,
"but that all thus appointed accepted the
appointments, he simply antagonizes
the record.
We regard the question as TO whether
the so.called Legislature was legally organ
lied and constituted as being one Of the
most important inquiries in the case. II
will not do to take for granted that there
was legal Legislature in Arkansas to call
constitutional convention. 1t may be ad-
mitted that legislature has this power
but the next question is, did the Legisla-
ture do it, and Is it the act of the Legisla-
tureH 1t may be said that each house
judges for itself as to the election, return
and qualifications of its members. True.
If II be found that the persons in each house
were legally chosen as members, the find
ings Of the different houses are conclusive,
and cannot be reviewed even by tho Con-
gross Of the United States but the fact
ns 10 whether the members were legally
chosen, or whether they wero chosen
at all, Is one that Congress may, In a case
where one side contends that the act Is
that Of the Legislature Of q State, and the
other clnims Il Is not, enter upon inquiry
for the purpose OF ascertalnlng, not whether
the persons had the necessary quallAca.
lions, but whether they were chosen by
tho people In the manner and OF the time
prescribed by the constitution and laws Of
the State, The first inquiry then 49, were
there fifty vacancies In the Arkansas LegIs.
lature9 II not, how many were there
This Is the first fact that, In our opinion,
should DO determined, for II II should turn
out that the fifty persons Baxter
mt In tho Tagisiaturo undar tho YuIoa
Of q special election, were elected to
Ill vacancies that did not exist the
law calling constitutional conVen.
ton, is not, in point Of fact, a law at all.
The Senate of the United States has been
bordering over the question as to whether
Pinchback was elected Senator by legal
Legislature in the State of Louisiana. No
one questions the authority of the Senate
to make the inquiry. If this be true, why
is it that either House of Congress have
not the power to make an inquiry into and
ascertain whether an act by which State
government of this Union has been over
thrown, and, to use the language of the
President, by evidence, intimidation and
revolution" was and is the act of the
legislative department Of that State, or
whether it is the act of unauthorized per-
sons, who, by force, fraud, intimidation
and violence, usurped, without authority
of law, the livery Of Office which right
fully and legally belonged to others?
When the question of vacancy is deter
mined, the next question is, were they filled
in a legal manner2 The answer to this
query involves examination into two facts,
and perhaps three. First, had the Gov
ernor power to order new registration for
the purpose of allowing the registration of
a class who were not entitled to registra
ton under the law second, if he had, did
he have the power to remove the old regis
trars and appoint new? and third, if he pos
sessed both of these powers, had the regis
trars the power to remove the judges of
election, (when the law says the judges
shall hold their offices for two years, and
appoint other judges? These questions
answered in the affirmative, the next ques-
ton is, was either House of the Legisla-
ture legally organized2 But few days
since, Gen. De Trobriand entered the House
Of Representatives of the State of Louisiana
and took five persons out by force who
claimed to be members of that body, and
he was justified in so doing by the American
people, because these five persons did not
have such evidences of being elected as the
law of that State required. The testimony
in the Arkansas case shows that 90 persons
(Democrats) were admitted Us members of
the House by sixteen members Demo.
CratiC) of the old House Of Representatives,
and that eight members of the Senate cd.
mitted nine persons (Democrats) 10 seats
that had no evidence Of election whatever
save the certificate Of man who Is now
pretending 10 be Governor Of the State,
who swore before the committee that he
made the test up from Newspaper reports"
and that he never had In his possession IN
election return that In any manner related
TO the election Of tho persons certified by
him ~ elected, This, Of Itself, was bad
enough, but when VIC como 10 take Into
confederation that tho law did not author.
Izo him TO mako any such certificate, either
from tho returns or newspaper reports, II
will at once be seen that these persons were
admitted 10 seats without any evidence Of
election. II Congress can approve the act
OF Gen ral Do TrobrIand In the New Or.
leans matter, We do not sec how II can rec.
ognIze twenty.sIx persons as members Of
the House and nine persons as members Of
the General Assembly Of Arkansas, who
held seats therein under the circumstances
mn laya atafad