The Democratic advocate. [volume] (Westminster, Md.) 1865-1972, 1882-06-17
Contested Election Cases.
From the Baltinlore Slm.

From the Baltimore Sun.
There were announced at the opening of
the present Congress twenty-five contests fo-
seats in the House. Most of these were from
the Southern states, and upon frivolous
grounds. The smallness of the majority of
the party which organized the House put
premium, so to speak, upon contestants who
could if seated be counted upon to reinforce
the majority The first one of these contests
to be decided had no political significance, as
it concerned the seat of a territorial delegate,
who has no vote in Congress. 1t was the
notable contest of Campbell against Cannon,
the Mormon delegate, who confessedly re-
ceived the majority of the votes of the people
of Utah, but failed to get certificate of cleo
ton from the Gentle governor of that ter
ritorv. The House decided that neither of
the claimants had been lawfully elected, the
Democratic minority for the most part dis
senting. The next case was that of Lynch,
colored, Republican, against Chalmers, Dem
oefat, representing the ''Shoestring district
of Mississippi. The law of Mississippi for
bids election tickets to be in any way marked,
and some thousands of Lynch's tickets had
Distinguishing marks of kind pronounced
by the state court to be in contravention of
the statute These illegal ballots lost Lynch
the certificate of election in Mississippi, but
the Elections Committee of the House went
behind the decision of the Mississippi court,
and by counting the marked tickets made a
majority against Chalmers. Then followed
the case of Mackey against O'Connor for the
second district of South Carolina, the former
alleging fraud and ballot-box stuthng. But
it was shown that a very strong suspicion of
fraud attached to the testimony on which he
based his claim to O'Connor seat and on
which the committee ON elections founded
their report in his favor The purport of the
testimony furnished by Mackey was that by
repeating, ballotbox stufing and refusal to
count votes in his favor the Democrats elect
ed the gentleman whose seat he desired,
O'Connor's testimony, as originally taken,
controyerted these charges, and showed that
at the ten precincts whose votes were thrown
out altogether there was such high-handed
intimidation that as a rule neither white nor
colored Democrats could approach the polls
This testimony, it is alleged, was afterwards
garbled by the Republicans. Hence the
Democrats favored a reference of the whole
matter back 10 the committee on elections,
with instructions to investigate the whole
matter anew. with the view OF getting uncor-
rupted testimony. Then came the hllibust-
ering, which lasted some ten days, as the Re-
publican majority, content with the evidence
as it was, insisted on immediate considera-
ton Consideration of the committees re-
port would, however, amount TO nothing
without the real facts, and hence the issue
was joined on that point. The result. as is
well known, WAS a rather revolutionary
altering Of the rules Of the House to prevent
resistance by the minority in contested elee-
ton eases, and, as a speedy consequence, the
seating OF Maekey. By similar partisan
action Finely, Democrat, Of Florida, has been
unseated in favor Of Bisbee, Republican, and
Wheeler. Democrat, Of Alabama, has been
unseated in favor of Lowe, Greenbacker.
Altogether, thus far, four contests have been
decided and four votes added to the majority,
the ike number being taken from the Demo
cratic minority. This practically amounts TO
an increased majority OF eight votes, which IS
sufficient to make II quorum under ordinary
circumstances without Democratic help. No
immediate action viii therefore be taken with
the remaining contested election cases.
Seven have been reported, aud nine remain
yet to be reported. Whether the good work.
ing majority now at the service Of the domi-
nant party sili, considering the questionable
means b. which it was gained, be likely to
promote virtaous and pure legislation re-
mains to be seen.