New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1893-03-10
HOUSE ELECTION CONTESTS.
TWO CASES THAT WERE NOT DECIDED
PROCRAsTIYATIoN OF TIE ELECTION con-
HouSE-A PLAIN RECITAL OF FACTS.

fBY TELEGRAPH TO THE TRiBuNE1
Washington March 0-The action OF the late
House OF Representatives In regard TO election con
tests furnished additional evidence, II any was needed
OF the necessity OF change IN the mcthd OF d"ag
with such cases. II the right Of the voters OF the
Congress districts to be represented In Ton
grcss by men wh1 the choice Of majority Is to
be preserved and maintained. Tile ease with which
a partisan majority In the House OF Representatives
NAV delay, and even prevent the consideration and
settlement OF election contest, was never more
clearly shown than during the Congress which has
inst expired. When that Congress assembled six
contests were pending. The testimony In all these
cases had already been printed and briefs OF counsel
submitted In accordance with the law which was
enacted TO facilitate the settlement Of contests. so
that every Representative should have clear ana I'M
disputed title TO the seat he occupied IL only re-
mained for the Committee on Elections. which CON
sisted of fifteen members. to examine the printed les
timony and briefs. consult the laws and presidents
bearing On the several hear such oral argyll
ments as the parties might desire TO submit and re-
port It's conclusions and recommendations to the IIcse
I'm only one OF the six was the testimony
voumnous. and IN none OF them were the questions
| OF law involved intricate or difficult.
There was no good reason whatever why every
case should not have been submitted TO the House
with the conclusions and recommendations OF the
Committee on Elections before April 1. 1892 Con
crcss remained I'm session than four months
after that date. and the report on contested cleo
ton case is a matter Of the highest privilege. and
may be called up at any time no matter what the
rules may prescribe or require to other business,
there was no reason whatever why every one OF the
cases should not have been disposed Of before Con
| gross adjourned on August 5, 1503. As matter OF
| fact however the election committee reported on
only three Of the before that date and OF those
| only two ncted upon by the House.
During the second session the Committee on Elec
tons continued to dawde. that the oral arguments
In two OF the three remaining cases were not heard
| until after the holiday recess, and the last case
| that OF Miller against Elliott. OF the With South
| Carolina district. not reported TO the House
| until within week OF the day on (which the LID
| Congress expired. II probably wouh not have been
reported at all had It rot been for the efforts 81
the Republican minority. whose views were submitted
| 10 the House with demand that they should be
printed careful search Of the last printed calcndar
OF the late Honse-that dated Friday, March Stalls
| TO show that the case ever reported, and there
| Is no entry save In the index to show that the
case Of Grcevy against scull. OF the ANth Pcnnsy
| vania district. ever reported from The committee
| Neither OF these cases acted upon hy IN"
| House. although that Of Grccvy against scull wa,
| submitted to that body several weeks before tic
| final adjournment OF Congress. Late IL the day
| before Congress expired the chairman of the Flee
tons Committee In rcsp1n-e To an inquiry 10y !"
Tiibune CORES pendent replied that he could not say
! when the Miller Elliott case would b" called ami
that he had been trying all day 10 get an opportunity
| TO cali up Grccvy against scull. which, under the
rules Ct the committee must be called mp first lie
| never found that opportunity. although lie had u
right 10 demand op-idcrliion ~ contested election
| AT my time on the last day Of the session. Only
a few hours before the expiration % The LID Con
| grcss Mr.. Johnson. 81 Indiana. member oi Inc
| minority Of the Elections Committee. demanded 'ha'
the Miller Elliott case should BE- copsidcr'd' no mem
i.. a. Incl In dp 10.
| Mr. John,Jn's motion promptly opposed oy
Mr.. Dockcry Democrat. OF Missouri. and WAS dc
| featol Ly a vote OF 81 yeas 10 l6i nays
This plain recital of facts clearly proves two Things
First. the Committee on Elections was Hm'N :"
| procraS,inaon and second, the Democratic mal'n'y
In the House elected and refused 10 do lis du'y
Not only 80. but the committee In H. report on 'nc
Miller. Elliott case and The House In rejecting IA"
| report Of the majority on the Noycs-R"ck"cl ca"
! both showed that they wcr" controlled By partisan
bias and prejudice In a remarkable degree 10 SAY
that other committees ana other political maioriii's
have shown similar bias will hardly be urged 10y any
fair and self respecting Icmocritc Representative III
the las, Congress, n an for this wrong. altoneh
| II wa. n consideration which Influenced many penn
| crats Who were members Their Of, aud who boldly
| declared their intention 10 get even with tie lie
publican majority Of the preceding ,Hnsr's, no ma g.,
rie aspcr.ions which they attempted to cast upon
and many of them knew II. In that CONGRESS NE
| Committee Elections call d upon Ia dea! WIN
no lnes than seventeen election contests lullnS
thnt from the lid Arkansas District, IN which ~" k'
| publican contestant had been a>saSslnael WINE en-
FACED I'm taking testimony hv the laVcs and murder
| ous partSans Of the Democratic sitting member. N
order tn prevent exposure OF the crimes wIlc ha'i
resulted I'm the awarding the latter Of "A frau Intent
and blood stained certificate II election In >iN NJ
thee cases the findings Of the Elections commute
We're in Of Democrats In one cn," In favor OF an
Ind, ID nlont and In ten against Democrats IN"
E,UhIcan majority In the House nnscat"d eight Demo
Gratis including Breckenridge Of Arkansas. ana seated
six Republicans and one Independent. The most
OlOroucl sitting OF the testimony VIII convince any
intelligent. fair minded man that the action "f b"lh
the committees and the onso In regard TO ihc,r case
was moi only lust and reasonable. but unusually Tree
from PARTS bias and II certainly was III strlhnS
ntras the conduct OF the last House OF Ecps-
! scntatives In like cases.