Clarksville weekly chronicle. (Clarksville, Tenn.) 1873-1890, 1880-05-01

batted the position Of the minority
report by cORtendiRg that this WIS
no lawsuit between Kellogg and
Spofford; that it was not lawsuit
at all; that the senate was not a
court of law, but a department of
the supreme legislature of the na-
ton; that the parties to this contro-
versy were not Kellogg and Spofiord
at all, but that thestate of Louisiana
was pleading before the United
States senate for the redress of a
grievolls wrong i'm being for three
years deprived Of her indefeasihle.
right to be represented by Il senator
of her choice. This, the senator
contended, was not a thing 10 he
closed out by pettifogging denaF-
rers that might come in rs the prac-
tice of nisi pzius court, but that
before the United States senatether
was no estoppal against the redress
of grievance, and that no statute
of Limitations GOULD be pleaded in
behalf of known and demonstrated
fraud.
But we are using words Of our
own to express what is much more
forcibly put in Senator Bailey's own
expressions, which we subioin, only
expressing the hope that our read
ers may have the opportunity Of
reading the arguments entire:
| If the matter under consideration
was one that affected only the rights
of Mr.. kellogg and Mr.. SpoiIord
| there would be much force in tie
argument favOring the adoption of
the rule. If this were a controversy
as to which of the two gentlemen
| should enjoy the emOlunents and
be entitled to the dignity and honor
of seat in the senate OF the United
| States, the senate might well say,
! indeed, having regard to the CRAWL
j ty of its duties and its responsible
ties to the public, it should say:
at does not cOmport with the dig
| nifty of this body or with the public
4 interests that the controversy shall
be prolonged" The senate should
dismiss the application and proceed
to perform other and more Import
ant duties. This is not such con-
! trOveFSy; it Ii one i'm which the
state of Louisiana and the whole
people of the United States are inter-
ested. 1t involves grave questions
of public and constitutional law and
| reaches to the very foundations on
which our frame of government
rests. 1t involves the relations of
the states of this Union Ia the na-
tiOnal government; the rights Of the
states and of the people of ali the
states.
One of the states appears at the
bar Of the senate and demands that
sentatiun shall be respected. She
says that by mistake or fraud or a
wrong decision one has been admit
ted here as her representative who
in fact is not her representative, and
demands redress. She says that she
is prepared to demonstrate the fact
to the satisfaction Of the senate and
the whole country. But to this
earnest appeal it il proposed to
to reply. What you say may be
true. The one you have chosen
may have been rejected; another
person, stranger aud an alien to
your confidence may occupy the
seat prepared by the constitution
for your own accredited representa-
tive; he may have mounted to this
great position by fraud, by DECEIT,
by our own mistake, but we cannot |
revise or reverse our action. We
are fettered by rule borrowed for /
tine occasion from another tribunal,
and thewhole matter is res djuticata. /
Mr.. President, such reply is a |
denial to the state of right guar
an eed to her by the constitution. |
The right cannot be questioned. No |
statesman or jurist in this broad |
land has ever questioned it. MOL
one ever will. Has the former ac-
ton of the senate annulled it? Can |
that action anpul 1T? Has the right |
been merged in former judgnt mt, |
or hidden out of sight 50 that il cam
not be discovered? Not at all. It |
is a constitutional right and con-
tinues until satisfied. 1t can be sat |
isfied only by recognition. 1t con-
tinueS from day to day, from month
to month, from year to year. 1t
speaks to-day in tones as earnest
and in voice as exacting as it did
two years ago, 4 wrong Judgment /
of the senate cannot hush it into
silence, nor can the plea of res ddju-
dicdtd be accepted as its fqlhlment.
To give such an effect To the plea
places the senate above the constitu-
ton, and makes it the constituent
instead of the legislature of the
state. Such an answer declares that
although the former Judgment may
have been the result of a conspiracy,
or fraud, or mistake, now patent to
all the world, yet its effect is binding
and conclusive. II declares that the
state may be robbed Of its rlghF, its
constitutional right, to representa-
ton, not because of any fault or
error of its own, but because some
body else has been in fault, or has
been imposed upon. Such a doc
trine is mOnstrOus. Its only fOunda-
tion is the desire to eXalt the digni-
ty and value of the Judgment of this
body and escape the duty to perform
a constitutional obligation.
Nor can the failure to perform
this obligation be excused on the
miserable plea that there is danger
in the precedent. If Mr. Kellogg
was duly elected by the true and
lawful legislature of Louisiana, we
should be eager to confirm him in
possession of his seat and repel every
e1uft II remove him. On the other
hand, If Mr.. Spnff9rd has been elect ,
ed by the true and legal Legislature,
we should make haste to admit him !
to this body. Absolute JUSTICE re-
quires this to be done. The eonsti-
tuition requires it. 4 wrong decis- {
ion is always a dangerous one, and !
may become a bad precedent; but a !
right decision always stands as its
own Justification. Bad men may /
seek to pervert it to a bad use, but 9
good men will always be found to +
the principles upon which !
It rests and strip away every dis !
guise from the motives of those who \
1are profane 1t. e