Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1882-12-13
MEMPHIS APPEAL
WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER Ii, 1882


MANkIE G-CHA Frs I9BROGLIO.
Chalmers, in his effort 10 retain seat in
Congress, encounters as many difficulties rs
Japhet experienced 10 searching for his
father. The fates seem to dog his heels. In
his efforts TO reach the capitol OF the nation
he finds huge lion obstrHcting his path
way. 1t has been announced that Col. Man
ming will not accept a seat in the next Con-
gress by virtue of the certificate given him
by the legal authorities of Mississippi. This
information has greatly elated Gen. Chsl-
mers; but he cannot secure his seat by any
voluntary action on the part Of Col. Man
ming. The governor and the secretary Of
state of Mississippi in giving Manaing a GER
tifcate of election were influenced by hon:
est convictions. They obeyed the strict let
fer of the law, and acted according to the
precedent established two years ago and the
decision of the Supreme Court. The very
arguments used by Chalmers two years ago
TO convince the governor and secretary of
state that he was entitled to a GER
iiicate of election over Lynch, his
competitor, satisfied these officials that
Manning was entitled to the certificate
and it was given him in good faith. We
shall not here crilicise the correctness of the
opinions which induced them 10 give Chal-
mtrs a certificate IN 1880 and Manning in
1882. But they are men of integrity and
were no doubt actualed by honest and con-
scientious motives; and if Manning should
return his certificate, the governor and secre-
tary of state would not give Chalmers a GER
tificate, for such course would be
open confession that they were influenced
by corrupt motives in issuing a certificate 10
Chalmers in 1880 and Manning in 1882. The
State authorities of Mississippi cannot
change the policy adopted without stult6ca-
tion. If Manning should return the certif-
cate and refuse 10 accept seat by virtue of
a clerical error, the governor of Mississippi
would declare that there was a vacancy
in the Second Mississippi Congress
sional District and order new
election. We presume Col. Manning
will claim his seat on other grounds. If he
establishes the intimidation, bulldozing and
frauds said TO have been committed by Cbal-
mers and his friend he may possibly retain
his seat. But should he claim it by virtue
of his certificate, based on a clerical error,
it would be the duty of the House of Repre-
sentatives to go behind the returns, right
the Democrats have always maintained, and
correct all errors, whether they be in dis
honest count or the confessed mistake OF re-
turning officers. The Democrats would suf-
fer by a new election in the Second Dis
trict, as many of the best Democrats be-
lieve Gen. Chalmers is entitled to the GER
ti6cate and would vote in condemnation of
what they regard as unfair methods to de-
prive him of the seat to which he was honestly
elected. One thing is certain, the Demo-
cratic majority in the next Congress will not
refuse Chalmers his seat on account of the
clerical mistake in Tate county, as such
policy would be as infamous as the
oUtrages which have made the Republican
majority in the present Congress national
stencil. At the last session Democrats were
turned out on the most frivolous pretexts.
This disgraceful partisan action contributed
largely to the recent success of the Demo-
cratic party, and should they adopt the
same interruptions methods they will prove
themselves unworthy of the confidence
which the people have reposed in them.
The best thing for Manning and the Demo-
cratic party is TO permit Chalmers 10 occupy,
unmolested, the remnant of his political life
the seat TO which he was, in al probability,
elected b. the usual methods.