Centre Democrat. [volume] (Bellefonte, Pa.) 1848-1989, 1882-07-27
Contested Seats in Congress.

The present House has outstripped
the most reckless of its Republican
predecessors in its shameless violation
of the rights of representation in con-
tested election cases. No sooner was 1t
ascertained in the fall of 1880 that the
Republicans would be able to organize
the House with q small majority, eked
out with Greenbackers and Virginia
Readjnsters, than the party organs set
up the cry of fraud over the Congress.
sional elections in the South, and des-
ignated the seats from which the Dem
ocratic members-e would be eJected.
Upon this encouraging hint more than
n score of defeated candidates sprang
up, and lost no time in giving notice OF
contest. With so small and unreliable
a majority in the House, Robson and
the more unscrupulous party managers
recoenized the necessity of enlarging II
bv means of manufactured contests for
reversing the decision of the ballot box.
When Keifer was made Speaker there
was no difficulty in securing partisan
committee that would perform with
zeal the work cut out for IT,, The TACT
that a Virginia Readjuster and 2 Texas
Greenbacker were assigned to the Dem
ocratic minority of the committee,
though both of them are more bitter
enemies of the Democratic party than
are the Republicans themselves, suffi-
ciently attests the partisan indecency
with which Speaker Keifer packed this
committee.
In nearly all the cases already de.
cided and now pending the majorities
of the sitting members-otficially count
ed and returned-run up to the thou.
sands; but this consideration has no
effect upon partisan committee organ
lied for the purpose of enlarging the
Republican majority in the House. The
committee was supplied by the contest.
ants with abundance of testimony III
regard to bulldozing and violence at the
polls in the afiidavits of ignorant ne
groes, who did not know how they
voted and had but dim conception OF
what they were swearing to. Upon such
testimony a popular majority OF thou
sands is overthrow, report is made
by the committee, accompanied by
resolution that the sitting member be
elected, and the report is adopted by
the House, not ten members of which
have given the least attention to the
case until brought up for vote under
suspension of the rules. It.is absurd to
pretend that there was anything like
judicial fairness in the determination
of these contested election cases. The
action of the Democratic majority in
the last Congress is in creditable con.
trast with the partisan indecency of the
Republicans in the present House.
There was the same temptation in
meagre majority, and in the cases OF
Curtin VS.. Yocum, Donpelly VS.. Wash
burn, and in others, the majorities re.
turned for the sitting Republicans were
so small and the claims OF the contest.
ants so plausible that it would not have
caused much of strain to render q
partisan decision. But the Democrats
in the last Congress were so anxious TO
make q record and set an example OF
impartiality in contested elections that
they leaned little to the side of the
opposition. The example was thrown
away upon the present Republican
House.
The latest contested elections case
decided in the usual partisan way is that
of Smalls against Tillman, from South
Carolina. Tillman's majority was up in
the thousands, but upon the usual negro
affidavits of bulldozing, fraud, violence
and tissue ballots a partisan committee
had no trouble in wiping it away. If
Tillman was not entitled to the seat ii
is still more certain that Smalls was
never elected but by the same party
vote in the House the one was elected
ane the other admitted. This case was
80 shamelessly indecent in its violation
of every principle of law governing con.
tested election cases that Mr.. Calkins,
of Indiana, Chairman of the committee,
voted against the resolution declaring
Smalls entitled to the seat. In address
ing the House in his own behalf, and
anticipating the usual partisan de-
cision, Mr.. Tillman earnestly argued in
favor Of the establishment Of some i'm
partial judicial tribunal for the determ.
ination of contested election cases. The
House is the judge of the election and
qualification of its own members but
this does not prevent the House from
erecting Court which will make ju.
dicial Investigation of which partisan
committee is incapable. In the English
Commons there were much the same
scandals that are now witnessed in the
American Congress when the same sys-
tenn prevailed. But in England con.
tested election cases are sent to the
zset.eta Il, Ioosatos, and fhara IL an and