Savannah morning news. [volume] (Savannah) 1868-1887, 1883-12-20
IN SENATE AND HOUSE.
MIR. Keifer Makes Himself Heard in Il
skinner Case.

Mr.. Keifer Makes Himself Heard in the
skinner Case.
WASHINGTON, Dec. 19.-In the House
this morning, Mr.. Scales, of North Caro-
lima, presented the certificate of election
of Thomas G. Skinner as Representative
elect from the First district of North Caro-
lima. After the reading of the certificate
Mr.. Keifer, of Ohio, offered a resolution
reciting that at the November election W.
II. Poole was elected as Representative
from the First district of North Carolina;
that he died August %, 1888; that since
the election of Mr.. Poole the Legislature
has redistricted the State and created a
new First district; that the Governor
of North Carolina ordered an
election, by virtue of which Mr.
Skinner claims the seat, and that to adj
nit him would leave one county without
representation, while another county
would have two Representatives, and re-
ferring Mr.. SINNERS credentials ts the
Committee on Elections with power to
| ascertain and report all the facts pertain
ing to the vacancy and the election to fill
the same. Mr.. Keifer contended that the
resolution presented a question which
should be inquired into by the Committee
on Elections, and asserted that the paper
read could not be called a certificate at all
within the meaning of the rules which
have prevailed in the House. The very
fact that the paper bore the date of the 18th
of December, 1888, suggested that it had
cost a good deal of trouble, time and
mental anxiety to get a paper which
would not show what the law required
should be shown. AS a matter of fact
there had not been a vacancy in the dis
trict which Mr.. Skinner claimed to repre-
sent. He quoted from precedents to show
that in cases of vacancy, when in the
interim between the first and second cleo
tiOns the State had been redIstricted, the
second election was held in the old dis
trict. and not, as in the pending case, in
the new.
There was, he admitted, precedent to
be found in the Perkins case in the Thirty
first Congress which might be cited to
strengthen Mr.. SINNERS position. Mr..
Perkins was elected from new district
to fill vacancy occurring in an old dis
trict, and he was admitted to his seat by
a vote of 90 to 80, but all authorities pre-
sented grave reasons for questioning the
soundness Of that decision.
Mr.. Scales, of North Carolina, out
lined the history of the case and con-
tended that there was no reason why
suspicion should attach to the fact
that the certificate bore date of the
18th of December, 1888, because the can
Yassing board did not meet and act until
that day. There was no weight in the
claim that the paper read was not a GER
tificate of election. 1t was a commission
to Mr.. Skinner declaring that he had been
duly elected as Representative from the
First district of North Carolina, and
with that commission in his hand he
came and insisted that he should
be accorded his right to a seat.
There was but one precedent for this
case, that of Perkins, of New Hampshire,
cited by the gentleman from Ohio Mr..
Keifer), Mr.. Perkins, standing in the
identical position in which Mr.. Skinner
now stood, was sworn in, and acting
under the only precedent known to law
the Governor of North Carolina had issued
his writ. Mr.. Scales argued at some
length that Mr.. Skinner presented an in
vulnerable prima facie case. If the
| house should hereafter come to the con-