St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1895-02-07
FURLONG IS FIXED
In the Seat in the House to
Which He Was Elected
Last Fall.
A REPUBLICAN HOUSE
Seats a Democratic Member
Over a Republican Con-
te3tant.
SOME PROPOSED LAWS.
One by Mr.. Warner Is a Thou
sand Dollar Bonus to
Sheriff Chapel.
SOME PROPOSED LAWS.

Yesterdays session of the house of
representatives was taken up very
largely by the Allen-Furlong contest,
which has been in the hands OF the cum-
mittee on elections since the beginning
Of the session.
As already reported in these columns,
the committee had thoroughly sifted the
matter and determined that there was
no question before the house. The at
torneys for the contestant had neglected
even the most ordinary formaiirtes in
the service of their notice of contest,
and the committee extended courtesy
rather than granted demand in hear
ing the case at all.
The Probstfeld Smith contest in the
senate had already settled the Gu 'Stlnns
of law involved in this cast, and the
committee, as Mr.. Jones, its chairman,
said. recognizes the fact that it would
be rank injustice, as well as estaO-
fishing a dangerous precedent, to I'M
seat Democrat in the house on exactly
the same grounds upon which RepuD-
iican had Just been seated in the senate.
At IL O'Clock, the hour set for the
hearing OF the case. Chairman Jones, OF
the elections committee, moved 10 re-
commit the case to The committee for
further consideration.
Mir. Johns thought there was no prac-
tical purpose 10 be served by recommlt-
ting. as the committee had already gone
over all the evidence, and had reported
on the only questions of fact which
could be raised.
Mir. Gibbs amended Mr.. Jones' motion
to the purpose that the committee
should report to the house the number
of votes found for each candidate.
Mr.. Johns said this could be stated by
the committee without recOmmittIHg,
and the amendment was voted down. as
was the original motion Immediately
after.
Mr.. Jones then took the floor and
made an elaborate statement Of the
work and findings OF the committee,
first moving the adoption of the COM
mttee's report, to place it properly be-
fore the house. His statement of the
case was a clear, concise and business
like address, setting forth that the at
torneys for the contestant had failed to
comply with any of the requirements
Of the law Of contests, and that the case
had been considered by the committee
as matter of courtesy; at no time had
the contestant been legally in court.
The evidence, it was true, tended to
I,n 4
plurality of two votes, but the evil
dence itself was conflicting and unsat-
isfactory. The committee was conf
posed of members of all three parties.
and was unanimous in its finding of the
facts and lis construction of the law.
The notice of contest cited the contestee
TO appear'On the first Monday III Janu-
ary." or before there was any one 10
hear the contest. 1t did not state that the
contestant was a candidate. or even an
elector. For all the information con-
tanned in the notice he might have been
a minor, an alien or a woman. 1t did
not state the number of votes received
by either party, and was, in fact, no
notice III the legal sense.
Notwithstanding all these Irregular
tiles, the committee had given the case
a patient hearing. 1t had carefully
weighed all the facts and considered
the law, with the result of q recon-
mendatiOn fayoring FurlOng.
Mr. Gibbs moved that the contestant
be allowed an hour in which to submit
his case through his attorneys, that the
cOntestee be allowed the same time to
answer, and the contestant another half
hour in which to sum up. This propo-
stiOn was qualified by an amendment
from Mr.. Douglass, who thought half
an hour was enough for each lawyer.
Tie amendment was lost and Mr..
Gibbs motion prevailed.
Attorney LafayetteFrench, of Austin
answered for the contestant. and with
little delay essaycd the task Of unSeat-
ing the sitting member. He criticised
with some harshness the action of the
committee, which, he declared, had
prejudiced the case with the assumed
wisdom of Solomon. He hurled at the
house the judicial tribunal" which is
the LAWYERS favorite weapon, and asked
the members as a body to transform
themselves into that kind of a body.
But only 4 minute later he had them
back in their old capacity by declaring
that, while these lechnicalities might
be considered before a court OF
law, they ought not to count be.
fore a body whose powers were
sovereign. Mr.. French consumed his
full hour in reviewing the evidence and
the opinions Of the attorney general and
other lawyers who had decided adverse.
~ 10 his client. He quoted plenty OF
authorities TO show that he was right
and the others wrong, and only little
later Attorney Horton quoted more
authorities from the same books tC
show that he was right and French was
wrong.
1t was evidently good law, for II
worked both ways.
Upon the completion of Mr.. French,
argument the house took a recess to
o'clock p. IN.
Immediately upon the resumption O.
business in the afternoon Mr.. Horton
took the floor in answer to the argumen
Of Mr.. French. Mr.. Horton made n,
attempt at Oratory, but confined himsel
strictly TO the legal aspects of the ques
ti&n AMI Il searching review of the eVi
dence. He took the position at the out
set that the contestant was not anC
never had been in any sense properI,
before the house. He clearly established
the fact that the case was analogou.
with that of Probslfeld against Smith
but in the course Of his argumen
showed that the only competent evi