National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1882-05-24
WHY tho Dcmoorats Tillibuster.

vance what course of action the Demo-
cratic party will pursue in any given case.
For the past three days IL has been filli-
clustering to retain solid Democratic
delegation so far as returned from the
South. It's leaders have served notice on
the Republican party that not another
Republican member shall be seated, and
that the House shall not even discuss the
report of the Committee on Elections.
The case of Mackey, which the majority
is attempting to take up, is the strongest
case which has been before the Commit
tee on Elections. In every election dis
trict in the entire congressional district
the managers of election were Democrats.
They had control of the boxes; they
decided who should vote and who should
not. At the close Of the polls more
than 6,000 ballots in excess of the voters
were found in the boxes. 1t is impossi-
BILE for the Republicans to have commit
ted this outrage. In drawing out this
excess only Democrats handled the bal
lots. When this fraud was cousummated,
and the count completed on the evening
of the election at the several precincts,
Mackey had still left u majority of $40.
II is true that his real majority was over
5000, but the Elections Committee decided
that it would count the vote precisely as
the Democratic managers of election
counted it, and rs the supreme court of
South Carolina, in decision rendered in
this. case, said the county canvassers ought
to have counted it.
When the returns of the precinct man
ayers of the three counties comprising
the district were sent up TO the county
canvasscrs the latter found that if they
counted them rs returned it would not
only elect Mackey, but also the full Re-
publican ticket in both Charleston and
Omngeburg Counties. Something must
be done. In Charleston the Republican
majority, according TO the count of the
Democratic precinct managers, was ] ,S2i.
The county board first reversed the poll
of Hnut Gap, which had given Repub-
lican majority of 90l, and counted it as
giving Democratic majority of 1888
Next it rejected seven polls in violation
of law, as the supreme court of South
Carolina decided on July /, 1881. After
this glaring fraud had been committed
OConnor and the Democratic county
ticket was declared to have received 3,30S
majority in that county.
In Orangeburg County, the home OF
Samuel Dibble, Mr.. Mackey and the Re-
publican county ticket, according to the
count of the Democratic managers, had
ninety-nine majority. To overcome this
| Mr.. Dibble filed written protests to the
county board against counting three Of
the precincts, and verbal protest against
counting q fourth, and thereby prevailed
upon the board, every member of which
was Democrat, to throw out these foui
polls. These four polls had, according tc
the count of the Democratic precinc
managers, given Republican majority
of 1,0l5. By this proceeding, instigaIet
by Mr.. Dibble, the county of Orangeburl
was returned by Mr.. Dibble's Democratic
board as giving a majority of 0l6 for Mr.
O'Connor and the Democratic county
ticket. The supreme court of South Caro-
lima on July /, 1881, decided that thi
was clear violation Of law and that the
county board should have counted tn,
returns precisely as the Democratic pre-
cinct managers counted them.
In Clarendon County the cheating wal
all done by the Democratic managers
but the Committee on Elections counted
the vote precisely as the managers ant
county board counted it,
This is plain statement of the case
as we understand it. Following thu
count of the precinct managers-all o
whom were Democrats-and the decision
of the supreme court of South Carolina
every member of which is Democrat
Mackey has $40 majority. 1t is true
that if the vote had been counted as cas-
his majority would have been over 1900
1t is amazing, therefore, that upon sucf
showing the Democrats should delib
erately resolve to defend and uphold
Dibble's title. If O'Connor was defeated
Dibble has no right whatever to a seat.
Dibble and the Democratic members o
the House cannot meet this damning rec
ord of fraud by charging that the recorC
has been forged. This charge of forger,
has been thoroughly investigated and re
futed. Dibble had n fair and full hearing
and all the time he asked. He has no new
evidence to offer. A ARepublican Congress
man tells us that Dibble is using tn
Democratic members just as he used hi
Democratic convassing boards; that h
tells them in language more emphati
than classic that if he is turned out it will
dishearten the Democrats of his district
and he can never again prevail lupon ther
to repeat the frauds of $780, that Ii
boldly demands that they protect him
that he tells them: "My election wi
be an Endorsement of Attorney-Generi
Brewster's action in prosecuting thos
men who served me. Their cases are sti
pending, and will you desert them?" A
one time he coaxes and another threaten
Will he succeed in forcing them to fill
buster? Will the few Northern Demo
Gratis permit the "Solid South" whip I
be cracked over their shoulders" w
shall see.
A SPECIAL dispatch to the Ereniag Sta