Litchfield enquirer., 1880-01-15
Maine.

|
 voidable. The Republican majority actually
 elected met, Monday night, organized their
 respective Houses of the Legislature, submitted
 the question of the legality of their orgarza
 tion to the Supreme Court, and adjourned till
 Saturday to await the decision of the court. | In the meantime the Fusionists have met fe. peatedly without 8 quorum present in the
 House, and have at last determined to proceed to the election of Governor and State officers | without having first decided upon the right of the ''counted out" members to take part in | that most important part of the whole business of the session.
 It has been probably wise party policy on the part of the Republicans to allow the Flu sion minority actually elected the opportunity to correct the sharp practice of the canvassing board before proceeding to the extreme meas ure of separate organization, but we have never expected any different action on the part of the Fusion minority than that of a rat ification of the original fraud:
 It is not in the nature of the political parti- san to give up any advantage he may hold just or unjust No party majority in legis- lative body, however small their right to their seats, has ever been known to bring in ma jority of political opponents. We do not claim any monopoly of virtue for Republicanism in this respect The legislature of Louisiana has repeatedly met in good old carpet bagging times with crowds of counted-in members for whom not single vote had been cast by the people. The very fact that the party tenure of office rested upon fraudulent counting made it certain that no counted-in member need fear losing his seat. The gross partisanshp exhibited in our national House of Represen- tatives and Senate, by both parties, is such that no man contesting a seat expects exact justice from either the committee which tries his case, or the House which decides it. Whenever party necessity requires it, the retention or the acquisition of a seat is decid ed by that necessity and without reference to law or justice. The Democratic majority in the present Congress have already acted in several cases on this familiar principle of par ty policy, and they will no doubt follow mp their unjust preliminary votes with equally unjust final decisions Perhaps the principle familiar to the constitution of all parlanenta- ry bodies, which gives them supreme control of their own membership is an unavoidable evil; but an evil. and a very serious! one, it has certainly become.
 It is from this vice of partsanship that the danger of fraudulent counting results. No one need expect majority of either party. wrong fully counted in, to give up the power thus wrongfully obtained out of regard to any con- alterations of law or justice. What then is to be the remedy where counting board fraud ulently reverses decision of the people at the polls? Plainly by separate organization of the members actually elected, regardless of returns. This throws the final decision into the courts or. in certain cases, upon the na- tionsl government. No doubt there may then arise serious danger of anarchy, or perhaps of unjust judicial or federal decisions but the dangers from these latter sources are infinitely less than the danger that the men who merely count the votes may prove able to override the verdicts of the people who cast the votes. We feel confident that the action of the true majority of the Maine legislature will be sus- tained by the judiciary of Maine; and, should the question come before the federal execu- tive by the same president who gave way to the manifest will of the people in South Caro- lima and Louisiana.
 Book DEBT.-We hope that one result of the adoption of the new code will be to restore to it's old place in Connecticut practice the good old action of 'sbook debt." Its advanta- ges are manifest. It covers nearlyif not quite the same grounds of action reached by the ''common counts'' now generally in use. It never needs change or amendment, whereas the practice act now requires that such of the items of account for which recovery is sought should be striken out lRules under Practice Act, p. 12, sec 1.). Defendants cannot de- mand jury trial as, they may do on the ''com- mon counts" (Practice Act, p. ?, sec. 22). Moreover the defendant in book debt must present all counter accounts he may have, on penalty of losing costs If he brings separate action (Gen. Statutes, D. 471); whereas on the common counts, the defendant may suffer the plaintiff to recover judgment, and then bring counter suit on his own account and re- cover full costs.
 Book Debt was allowed to fall into disuse under our old practice simply because the declaration was short, and attorneys and off, cers fees were less than under the common counts. Under the practice act, however, with the inapplicable counts struck out, the common count writ will, in most cases, be under a page in length, and the fees on it the same as in book debt.