Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1878-11-29
CONTESTED ELECTIONS.

The Republican papers are raising great
fuss over the prospect that the Democratic
candidates for Congress in about dozen
districts throughout the country propose to
contest the seats of the Republican candi-
dates who were successful in gaining the GER
tiicate of election. Without stopping to in
qure whether or not there is good ground
for contest, these papers charge that there
is conspiracy to defraud the Republicans
of their rights, and threaten all sorts of dire
vengeance in case the plan succeeds. These
mouthings are characteristic but harmless,
and will not deter any man who has good
case from urging the contest when the next
Congress shall assemble.
The constitution makes each house of
Congress the sole judge Of the qualifications
and election of its own members, and the
laws framed in accordance with
this provision provide modes of
procedure in cases of contest.
10 insist that any man who held certificate
of election is entitled to seat in Congress
is to insist that returning boards are in
all their conclusions, which, in view of the
fact, is to assert an absurdity. Returning
boards cannot go behind the face of the re-
turns-have no power in any of the States
to inquire into the fact of whether fraud was
attempted OF accomplished, or as to whether
intimidation was employed upon the voters.
They have no right to throw out the votes
from any voting precinct, even though they
know they are fraudulent, providing the re-
turns are made in accordance with law. Con-
gress alone has that power and can exercise
it impartially. When candidate, therefore,
thinks be has been defrauded out of an cleo
ton, ne has not only legal right but is IN
der moral obligation to demand an investi-
cation as to the facts in the case. While the
Republican party was in power in the lower
House of Congress, contests were quite as
numerous as they appear likely to be in the
next Congress- It will ever be q lasting dis
grace to that party that with rare
exceptions no judicial inquiry was made as
TO the facts in these cases, but the decision
was rendered on purely partisan grounds.
Scores Of instances are on record in which
there was no shadow of pretense that the
Democratic candidates were not elected, but
they were unceremoniously kicked out of the
House by strict party vote.
The Democrats who propose to contest the
election of their Republican opponents in the
next Congress have, SO far as we have been
able to ascertain. good grounds for the con-
test. In this district it is notorious that
Washburn procured his seeming election by
frauds, bribery, and intimidation the most
glaring. When the facts are spread before
the House we have no doubt he
will be deprived of his seat on
the very good ground that in law fraud
vitiates every contract of whatever nature.
Orth, in Indiana, was declared elected by a
majority of only twenty-seven votes. His
competitor, believing that majority to have
been honestly obtained, did not propose to
contest the election, until it was unexpected
ly developed during contest for a local
Office that over hundred fraudulent Repub-
lican votes had been cast. Then he changed
his mind and served notice of contest, as
it was his bounden duty to do. O'Hara, the
Republican candidate in one of the. North
Carolina districts, received majority of less
than hundred votes on the face of the re-
turns, but it has been shown that gang of
negro desperadoes took possession of the
polls at three districts, and by violence and
threats prevented any one from voting for
his Democratic opponent. Bisoee, of Flori-
da, has been declared elected, but it has been
proved beyond doubt that the polls were
kept open in his interest till after
midnight, and that large numbers of
fraudulent votes were cast for him. In
these cases it is the duty of the Democratic
candidates, both to themselves and their
constituents, to make contest, and we
have no doubt the House will decide the
cases judicially and impa1tially after thor