Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1885-11-04

them TO the Senate itself.
We are surprised that the journal
does not see how - thin - is the pretext
that the returns were ILLEGALLY modi-
fed" If Judge BUcHwALrER had
the right to pass upon the returns at
all. he had the right to pass upon them
whether they had been illegally modified
or not. More: If he had the right
claimed for him, he had the right to
order the election officers to certify the
election of the defeated candidates.
His own count" is all that bound
him. lie might have counted different
". Another judge might have thought
the four Democrats were lawfully
elected.
The Journal is blinded by its assnmp-
ton that fraud is confessed. We repeat
that the question to be decided is alto
gether independent Of the question of
fraud. The point we make is that no
court in Ohio can judge Of the returns
of the elections of State senator's
whether those returns be fraudulent or
not; that there are possibly dozen
judges in Ohio who would upon the
same state Of facts decide that the
"returns were not fraudulent. AT
any rate, we think our Providence con-
temporary must concede that at least
half the judges in Ohio, Rhode Island,
or any other State, would, if the case
were to come before them, decide
that they had no jurisdiction.
Recollect that the Constitution of
Ohio, like that of all the other States,
provides that each house Of the Legis-
lature shall be the judge Of the cleo
tions, qualifications, and returns of its
own members. Has any court the
right to judge Of the qualifications
of the Ohio senators? The Journal
will not set up this claim. If not, the
other claim falls with it; for surely if
Judge BUCHwALTER has the right to
pass upon the " elections y and the - re-
turns he has the right to pass upon
the e" qualifications" There can be no
doubt on that point. The "elections "
and the "returns " are just as sacred
as the qualifications" No hand can
touch the one which cannot touch the
other two.
If one court can rightfully take juris-
diction Of such cases in defiance Of the
Constitution, any court in Ohio can do
it. The result would be that every
member of the Legislature might owe
the "returns " Of his " election to a
court, and the political complexion of
the Legislature be entirely changed by
courts Of justice, so called.
And of course if the courts in such
cases may issue writs of mardamus and
compel the certiication of the election
Of State officers, the courts in the yari
GUS States may compel the election Off
GERS to certify the election Of member
of Congress for every district. tn,
Journal will Of course, if it is right il
regard to Ohio, be bound to conced
that the Federal courts have tn
right to compel the certlfication o
the elections" Of all the mem
bers of Congress; but it ma,
be disposed to deny this power to tn
State courts so Ear as congressman ar
concerned. But why? Will the JON
, nal say that the law or the Fedora
Constitution denies to State courts Ju
risdiction in such matters? That won
do. That is our side Of the case. w
say the Constitution expressly denie
them such jurisdiction. We add tina
it is the sole prerogative of each hOus
of Congress to judge in such cases. Blu
,, YOU contend that in issuing the writs G
, mandamus the courts are not eXercisln
! legislative functions, nor trenching J
the least upon the rights of the Leglsl'
ture. IL not, then the State court
would not be exercising legislative fun'
tons nor trenching in the least upo
the rights Of either house of Congress
Q thew should compel the issuance of ce
: tiflcates Of election to their fayori
+ candidates for Congress.
= Will the Journal say that any cou
n in Ohio gould issue mandamus to Il
2, Legislature Of Ohio to compel that boo
IS to certify the election Of JOHN SHE
y MAN, or anybody else, to the Unit
!. States Senate, even if it could be prov
10 that the General Assembly had
h. fraud defeated Mr.. PENDLEToN
T. elections IL not, our contemporary
~ whole case goes by the board. Let
ed stand super antiques pias.