Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1896-03-12
THE DU POINT CASE.

Not Question of Common Law, But of the
Meaning of Delaware's Constitution.
New York Times, March 9Th
The case of du Pont OF Delaware, in
whose favor majority of the Senate
committee on privileges and elections
has reported, arises new question,
and one peculiar TO that State. 1t looks
like very easy question to decide, II
the Senate continues to adhere TO its
conservative tradition in dealing with
contests. The facts are not disputed.
The United States law regulating the
election of Senators in joint assembly
of Legislature requires that candi-
date, in order to be elected, shall re-
ceive O majority of the votes cast,
quorum of both houses being present.
On May 9th, 1895, in the Delaware
Legislature 30 votes we're cast, of which
du Pont received 10, not a majority,
and there was declared to be no cleo
ton. The contest rests upon claim
that one of these 30 votes was not valid.
This is question of the meaning and
effect of the Constitution and laws Of
Delaware. That is small State, and
its Constitution is antiquated, framed
at time when its population was less
and conditions were simpler than they
dTb uUWs IL DTDNlutu llbultDdnL
Governor; each branch of the Legisla-
ture. one with only nine members and
the other with only 81, was to choose a
presiding officer from its own number,
to be called the Speaker - In case
of vacancy in the office of Governor, the
Speaker of the Senate was to exercise
the office until Governor elected by
the people shall be duly qualified.
Until last year such an exigency had
not arisen in 30 years, and, according
to the apparent intent of the Consti-
tuition and such precedent as existed,
it was considered that "the Speaker
of the Senate" performed the duties Of
the Executive, did not become actual
Governor of the State or cease to be
Senator in the Legislature. There was
no provision for filling his seat in the
Senate, and it was not regarded as va
cant, though Speaker pro tenn was
necessarily chosen to preside. While
the Senator exercising the Office Of
Governor in time of a vacancy in that
office might be so occupied with its
duties az to take no part in the proceed
ings of the Senate. he had the right to
do so, il any exigency required it, so
far as appeared from Constitution or
law or precedent in that State
While Addicks was making his effort
to capture the Senatorship last year and
kept the Republican vote SO divided
as to prevent an election, Acting Gov
ernor Watson took no part in the pro
ceedings OF the joint assembly, but
when it appeared that 10 votes were to
be cast for Republican candidate, not
withstanling that four still chung to
Addicks, be put in an appearance, took
the chair as Speaker, and cast his
own vote on the other side, making a
tie. He declared that there was no
election, and the Legislature adjourned
sine die
This is not question of common
law, or the American system, or prac-
| tice in other States as commended by
Senator Mitchell, chairman of the COM
mittee, but simply question whether,
under the Constitution and law and
practice in the State of Delaware, Act
ing Governor Watson was still mem
Der of the Senate of that State from the
county of Kent and its Speaker, I"
by virtue of which Office alone he was
authorized to "exercise the Office of
Governor during a vacancy therein.
There really seems to be no doubt about
| il