The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1891-01-26
A DANGEROUS PRECEDENT.

Should the State Senate decide the
Richards-M cCarty contest from the 34th
district on the lines laid down in their
committees report. it would establish a
dangerous precedent. This does not i'm
ply any reflection upon the inclinations of
the committee. 1t may be assumed that
they made what 10 them seemed the best
possible disposition of a complicated and
vexatious affair. In a party sense the
seating of the one or the other of these
contestants is of small consequence. The
Republicans have a majority SO large that
they can well afford to be strictly just and
fair in this matter, and such doubtless
would be the disposition of this committee
and of the Senate even if the majority
were narrower and the decisions of greater
political consequence.
But it happens that the conditions are
highly favorable TO the laying down of
rules and the adoption of a course of pro-
cedure in this case that will constitute
healthy precedent. rather than the reverse,
and which, as such, will command the
respect OF good citizens of all parties.
1t IS hardly necessary TO premise that
the observation-disclosures shares the general
Republican hope that in establishing
healthy precedent and deciding the con-
test on its merits and within correct. un-
assailahle lines, it will be found that Mr..
Richards, the Republican contestant. was
elected and is honestly entitled to the seat.
But it is neither to his interest nor that of
the party that he be seated on any other
grounds or in any other manner.
The committee in their report say that
'We find that from one house in said
ward 1.-THE End ward of Fairhaven) be-
tween % and 30 men were registered
on the registration book, and the
evidence clearly shows that such house
was incapable of accommodating that
many actual residents at one time, or even
half that number; that at that time there
were several persons living in the house
who were not voters, among them several
women
They also find that 'there were many
persons voted from this house" and
several who presented themselves and on
being challenged would not swear in their
votes. They also report themselves salts
fed that in the second ward fraudulent
voting was largely INDUCED in, and there
fore recommend that the whole of it he
thrown out. This would involve the
throwing out of total of 237 votes.
There is but one condition conceivable
under which this would he the best or a
proper way TO dispose of such a case.
That would be in case there were no legal
voters in the ward, or that all such were
participants in or INCREASINGLY cognizan,
of the preparation of the alleged frauds.
If there were qualified voters in that ward.
who honestly exercised their right of suf-
frage. who neither perpetrated frauds.
participated in them, winked at them nor
were cognizant Of them (aat il is hardly
conceivable that such was not the easel.
then those qualified voters are entitled 10
have their votes counted, and neither the
committee nor the Senate should be dis
posed To punish them for the offeuses OF
others by throwing out their votes because
Others were fraUdulcntly east
And in the matter 81 the house, espe-
cially referred to ia the committee report,
il vas only question of the votes cast by
residents Of that was At all pertinent TO
this inquiry lfthoSc thus cast, or any of
them were fraudulent. those fraudulent
votes should he thrown ont if il could be
shown for whom they were cast. or if an
honest. legitimate inference could be
formed on that point Rut if there were
qualified voters in that house they should
not be diStrancAised because others voted or
registered traudulently as residents of it.
Otherwise amy citizen may be disfran-
chised by the act Of another who votes or
registers as a resident q his premises.
The only fair and honest rule and safe
precedent is 70 take the official returns as
prinsa facie evidence of the facts therein
stated. and 30 discredit and change then,
only upon clear proof or fair inference of
specific frauds. As TO the one house which
was so strongly tainted, it might he adj
missihle to require the identification of
every person who voted Ter Il. or in an ex-
IRENE case this might he applied to pre-
cinct or ward. but republican institutions