New-York tribune., 1890-03-31
accepted by the local authorities To that end intena
to submit some amendments the bill it now stands
4 FAIR ELECTION COMMITTEE.
IT'S WORK IN ADJUDICATING CONTESTS BE,
FORE THE HOUSE.
THE EFFECT OF PARTY BIAS on PREVIOUS DEMe
CRATIC DEc1sIoSs-wHAT THE REPUB
LICANS ARE DOING.
tsr TELEGRAPH TO THE TRIBuSE.i


Washington. March 3o-In that "Addrcss to the
Countryn which he published some time ago. Mr.
Carlisle, in attempting to Justify the ridiculous and
dsgaceful acts and antics of his party In the House,
declared hat 1t plainly part of tine programme
/ of the majority TO unseat every Democrat who had
been elected but against whom contest was pending
and that TO prevent this contemplated Republican out
rage was one the grounds Of the stubborn and bitter
resistance of the Democrats to Tyrant' Reeds ruling
during the consideration Of the West Virginia case OF
Smith against Jackson and OF their subsequent op-
position to the code of rules.
Mr. Carlisle spoke as one having authority. lie
had been thrice chosen Speaker Of the House by his
party and he is its acknowledged leader In the Honsc
to-day. Mr. Carlisle is said to be good lawyer and
TO possess in a high degree the judicial temperi-
ment7 a term which must mean temperance, hr-
ness and impartality in statement, and also 'hat
mental poisc which enables Judge TO refrain from
prejudging even in his own mind-to say nothing OF
that infinitely grosscr outrage Of giving public u-
terancc 10 such parliamentary case In which lie
expects to sit as O Judge Mr.. Carlisle kncw when
he gave utterance to his aspersons upon the motives
and purposes Of the Republican members OF tho House.
including the Speaker of that body, that he was 70
sit as one of bench of 800 judges to try seventeen
contests each one of which involved the tito 10
seat in Congress- and yet he wiliuly and deliberately
and without having examined the testimony OF heaiu
the arguments ia one Of the preJudged oil OF
could with the aid Of the newspapers. Now, as
repfesentative and leader of his party in Congress- as
one who has wide and strong influence upon 'hc
thought and opinions Of millions OF men VINO belong
to his party as judge who declares before the cases
arc tried what his decision will be in seventeen cases.
and AS Representative who in advance OF any action
by them 10 justify IT, publicly imputes dlshohoraole
motives TO 169 other Representatives. Mr.. Carlisle be-
comes OF enough consequence to justify some reference
10 the manner in which election contests mciuulhs
one in which he had the deepest personal interest
were decided during the three terms OF MS speaker
shin: and to compare both the manner ana con
olusions with those of the present committee anu
House.
In the XLvIIIth Congress Speaker Carlisle Tor the
erst time appointed Committee OIL Elections. fonr-
teen seats were contested. In the case OF Chalners
against Manning, Of Mississippi, the latter VINO h"u
not accepted the certificate awarded 10 MN oy 'hc
Democratic Governor Of Mississippi. paid 10 attention
10 Chalmerss notice OF contest and the latter hled GER
tilted returns showing that majority or the Notcs
had been cast for him. Upon that proof OF prna iace
title there nothing to do except to seat hin' Even
Democratic House could not give the seat 10 ahyoouy
else.
Tho contest, of Wood against Peters. Of Kansas.
did not deserve to be dignlfed by such name. Inc
Representatives in tie XLvIIlth Congress from tlat
State wcrc all elected " at large" Wood. who was
Greenback Democratic candidate. defeated by some
IL, 900 majority lie then attacked Peterss t'ie. on
the ground that when elected. he held staic ONCE
His contest consisted OF a wordy petition ana DOM
bastic speech which weared the House for couple
Of hours And yet Democratic member OF the com
mttee supported WOODS RIDICULOUS pre,chson' VI
claim TO seat.
In the case Of Craig against Shelley, OF Alabama,
the former. who Republican, produced ccrtifed
documents showing that on the original returns Trans
mts- 10 the state canvassers lie was entitled TO IL
majority Of several thousand votes shelley now
ever, had received the certificate. He was unseaea
by Democratic House account OF the awkwardncss
Of his friends enough Democratic members OF the com
mttee Joining the Republicans to effect that result
That it may be added. was the only case In the last
three Democratic Congresses I'm which a Republican
contestant was successful in obtaining possession OF
the seat TO which he was entitled
In the case o; Massey against Wise. of Virginia.
the Republican sitting member whose election was
conceded iy everybody. allowed 10 retain his
sent sinply because the Democrats did not dare 10
override numerous Democratic precedents and unseai
lin on the ground that he held another onicc AT the
time Of his election to Congress In tho cases Of
Mclean against Broafhoad Of Missouri, and bothin
against Noelnns. OF Montana. the Republican mem
iers OF the Committee Elections Joined with the
Democratic members in reports favorlng the sitting
members, both Of whom were Democratic
In the other eight Republican sitting members
we're otstcd Oh the recommendation OF The Democratic
majority Of the Elections Committee and their seats
wero awarded to Democrats. In each Oi 'heae caScs
tho committee divided on party Lines, and In six OF
tben tsc Republicans had been elected by extremely
small plusalitics-the highest being EOS, while the
others ranged from eghty-scvcn down to four votes
Perhaps that fact nay account largely ior tho
iudcIalp action Of the Democratic majority Of the
committee and the Democratic majority OF the House.
and vet IL always has seemed strange that who,
presumably or ostcnsbly. Is. least were acting III
lr,ely judicial capacity should have reached de
cison adverse TO tie sitting members in every one Of
The six cases. 1t indicates pretty well what would
have been the fate Of Wi-c II his plurality had been
sixty or Geo instead Of 5000 the fate OF Chalmers
II any Democrat had appeared to contest his majority
of some oOO the result OF Ciss case II his actual
majority on the face Of the county returns certified
by Democratic officers had not into the thousands
In tho remaining case, Luna, Of New Mexico, had
clear certified majority of nearly 500 and yet his
seat was given 10 ManMnarc'. The Democrat IL
might be q profitable exercise Tor Mr. Carlisle TO com
pare the work OF his first Elections Committee with
that done By the present committee and then explain
and defend. If he do 50, the abusive CRITICISMS Oi
the latter by himself and his followers.
| The chairman Of Speaker CarlIsc's Committee Oh
Elections in the XLIXth Congress wac Mr. Turner, Of
Georgia. only four election contests were pending.
In the case OF IIurd against Romcs Of the Xth Ohio
! District, the chairman ard two other Democratic
members Of the committee agreed with the Republican
members In favor Of Kones respecting whose election
tncrc could have been no shadow Of doubt in any Nm
partial mind. still, four Democrats stood By iiud
and two othof Democratic members OF the committee
! held that neither llurd nor Komes was entitled w
Tie seat. All that saved the latter, however, was
the fact that iurd among other things had charged
intimidation OF voters and OF The southern Demo
cratic members were Obliged TO side with the Repubi
cans or spoil all future southcTH cases. sun, there
was 10 ground for honest difference OF opinion In
regard TO any aspect II the case.
OF the Of kidd against steele, OF Indiana the
saric remark Is true. in that ease the committee
made a unanimous report in favor q The Republican
sitting member. In The Of Campbell against
| Weaver Of Iowa. the committee divided on party
lines although ~ report In favor Of Weaver the Dem
ocratc members were compelled 10 Violate Demo
cratic precedent set by their own committee IN ne
IIcusc In the case II Page against Pierce Of Rhode
Island, the Democrats were again Obliged to violate
"a Democratic precedent made Ia The case OF UIiua,
of North Carolina But then O'liaia was Ecpdbli.
can and PAGE h Democrat, and tiat fact fnay
have had weight. Major Pierce was unscaied