The Portland daily press., 1890-12-10

tneSo f0ur copies, one TO the ONCE OIL the
chief supervisor Of elections for the district,
elected, another to the clerk OF the National
House of Representatives, and the fourth to
the Secretary of State at Washington.
Meanwhile the returns made out by the
state inspectors have been received by the
governor and tabulated. and in due time the
governor of the state sends to the clerk of
the National House certificate of the cleo
ton. AT the present time the governors
certificate is members only title TO a seat,
and If the governor issues certificate to q
person declared elected on a fraudulent
count the aggrieved candidates only re-
course Is an expensive contest before the
next House of Representatives. II the ma
jority of that House happens to be of the op-
opposite party the aggrieved candidate will
not generally feel that it will be profitable to
contest however righteous his cause may be.
Under the Lodge bill the governors certi-
ficate will not be final, for the clerk of the
House will also have the certificate trans
mtted by the United States board of can
vaSsers. But neither is the canvassers' GER
tificate to be final, nor will 1t necessarily en-
title the man whom it declares to be elected
to be put upon the roll Of the House. This
brings us TO an important portion of the bill,
ard a portion which the Democrats studi0us-
ly throw into the background.
".
1t has been widely represented that the
return of the United States canvassers
would be the prinlG fGcie authorization of
the member returned as elected to have his
name placed upon the rolls of the House. 1t
has therefore been urged. not without force,
that the United States returns might be as
bad one way as the state returns are accused
of being the other; that 1t was merely tax
ing the alleged opportunity to manipulate
returns from the state authorities and Civ
ing it to the United States authorities. 1t
has been urged that United States election
officials are no more likely to be honest than
state election officials. There has been force
in this argument when applied to the imagi-
nary elections bill. When applied to the
real bill now before the Senate, the argu-
ment has no force whatever, as will be seen
readily by examining section IA.
$50 soon as the certificate Of said board
Iboard of United States canvassersl has been
issued" says this section OF the bill, "any
person who was at said election candidate
for representative or delegate in Congress
and who deems himself aggrieved by the ac-
tl0n OF said board may present to the cir
cult court of the United States having juris-
diction in the district where said election
was held his petition which shall be duly
sworn to. and shall setif0rth that he believes
himself to have been duly elected and the
ground or grounds upon which he insists
that the action of said board In Issuing said
certificate Is erroneous. Thereupon the
circuit court must examine into the election
United States supervisors count one candi-
date in and the state inspectors another. the
court will determine which candidate has
been rightfully elected. Until this appeal to
the court shall have been decided the clerk
of thes sUnited States House of Representa-
tiyes cannot place either candidate upon the
roll of the House, and after the court shall
have decided the clerk must proceed in ac-
c0rdance with the decision.
If such plan is not safe and fair no prOpO-
Sltion in government ever wa safe and fair.
Moreover it would remove from the House
Of Representatives the decision of a large
number of contested election cases with all
tile attendant charges and suspicious OF par
and unfairness But this provision
Of the bill is studiously ignored, and there
are probably not hundred men in all New
England who read Democratic papers ex-
who know that there is any such
provision In the bill.
This principle of judicial determination of
election contests is carried still further by
another section of the bill. Section 2S pro-
VideS that whenever it shall appear by pc
tition under oath that errors have occurred
n the determination of any board of can
Vassers, either national, state. territorial,
county, or other local board In any state or
territory in the matter of the votes cast for
1 representative or delegate in Congress,
The Circuit Court of the United States In the
judicial district In which any such board of
shall have met and &C led in re-
'pect thereto may, by order, require any
such board to correct such errors or show
,ause why such correction should not be
made, and, In the event of the failure of any
such board to make such correction or show
cause as aforesaid, the said court may COM
pei any such board, by writ of mandamus,
10 correct such errors; and II any such
board of canvassers shall have made its de-
termination and dissolved, such court may
1nmnpl If IN rp-pnnVana for the nurn0SA nf
making such corrections" This, of course,
gives additional opportunities of arriving at
l judicial determination of election quarrelS
without awaiting the decision of the House
Of Representatives.
The penalty clauses of the bill have been
loudly decried as oppressive. An enumera-
ton of these penalties will disclose how
much reason there is in this cry. For the
bribery of voters or OF election officers there
Is a penalty of not more than $1,000 fiue or
Imprisonment for not more than three
years, or both; for false entries on registra-
ton books or wilfully putting on names of
persons not entitled to vote or keeping off
the names of persons entitled to vote, or for
wilfully keeping false poll list, or for will
fully excluding from the ballot box, or for
wilfully admitting to the ballot box any vote
not entitled to go there, or for altering, mu-
tiIating or stealing ballots there Is penalty
Of not more than $1,000 fine or imprisonment
Of not over three years or both. Perhaps
these penalties would not be comfortable,
but they will not be imposed upon any peo-
pie who do not do the prohibited things.
VII.
Like the present law the elections bill
does not apply to every congressional dis
trlct, but only to such as may demand 1t.
Under the present law two voters in any
city of over 10000 inhabitants, or 10 voters
In any county or parish of a congressional
OaflfiOn SfatnG n
pervlslon aod 1t will be granted. Under the
Lodge bill it would be somewhat more diff
cult to set the machinery of supervision into
operation, as the petition of 100 legal voters
IN IN city OF over 10000 Inhabitants would be
required, and the petition of 80 voters in par
ishes, counties, etc. Districts may be super
vised in whole or in part, as the law would
apply as follows: First, in any entire Con-
gressional district, second, in any entire
city or town having 10000 inhabitants or np-
wards by the last preceding census Of the
United States, whether such city or town
contain one or more congressional districts
or part only OF one or more congressional
districts; third, in any parish, county, city,
town, or election precinct in any congress
ional district.
This is the bill against which the epithets
Of "force bill' and "bayonets" are hurled.
Ihere Is no more forcs in it than in every
other law that has the majesty of the United
States back of it. As the last resort every Uni
ted States law has "bayonets" behind II,
and were it not so this nation would crum-
Bile. In the present debate in the Senate
these epithets have been supplemented by
another argument which thoughtful men
will do we'll to consider. Senators like Tur-
pie of Indiana and Pugh of Alabama, have
first laid down the proposition that the suf-
frage Is free and fair in the South Then
they have proceeded to argue that the negro
is inferior to the white race and cannot rule
Then they proceed to urge that the pending
bill will enable him to rule. They admit that
the Constitution of the United States guar
antees to every citizen the rights Of the
franchise irrespective of race or color, but
they deduce from their argument of race in
feriority an argument sustaining "higher
law" than the Constitution. 1t is plain that
I the suffrage In the South is already free
and fair there is no pertinency in the other
arguments; and II the suffrage is not fair
then the Southern gentlemen must
mean to override the Constitution of the
United States in Difference to "higher
law"
RoCKLAND NEWS.
-. nA&axAAH-rk@ fkus