The Abbeville press and banner. [volume] (Abbeville, S.C.) 1869-1924, 1896-02-12

account of race, color or previous condition
OF servitude Omitted States vs. Reese, 82 U. s..
2l4. 2l7); and II we will further bear In mind
that the registration ana election laws o o.
count OF race, color or previous condition O.
seryitude, but that by their terms they oper
ate upon every class and condition alike, We
shall see why 1t was that Judge Goff. wearing
the ernine Of the Federal Judiciary. was
without authority or Jurisdiction to interpose
in the affairs Of South Carolina. And when
he delivered the political TRADE from the
bench that he did, the Circuit Court OF Ap
peals had no alternative but to tell him thai
the Federal ermine could not be the cloak fol
such utterances.
This law Of South Carolina of which the
contestant com plains. went upon the statute
hooks of 1892. For thirteen years II has been
accepted as the law OF the State. All elections
during that time have been conducted under
II. Men have occupied seats In this House
for dozen years as the result of elections
held under II. Members Of the State legsla
ture, elected under its provisions, have sent
men to the other branch OF the Congress as
Senators who have there exercised their func'
tions without let or hindrance. During oil
these years this law has remained undisturb
ed by the courts and 1t stands now unim
paired by the Judgment or decree Of any
court com petent to pass upon It,
"And yet this contestant, after all these
years, comes here and asks the House OF Rep
resentaIves to inquire whether the law does
not deny the right Of suffrage 10 persons who
United States have never assumed to say
what shall constitute the qualifications ol
electors, declaring merely that the electors In
each State for members Of the House Of Rep
reSentatives "shall have the qualifications re-
quisite for electors OF the most numerous
branch Of the State legislatures" and despite
of the electors that Is under the control of the
Congress, but only 1.-THE times, places and
manner of holding the elections" the con.
testant has, nevertheless, come TO this House
IocI o1 n rH n 10 VI n 40 uI a
which declares that compliance with It's pro
visions shall be prereq uisite TO voting. Un'
der the plea that each House OF Congress is
"the judge OF the elections of its own mem.
bers' this House Is asked TO judge, not mere.
| ly OF the manner in which an election was
| held, but also Of the law which determined
the qualification of the electors; 10 judge,
not merely whethtra u fraud was perpetraled
upon voters and upon the law, but whether
the law, which for thirteen years has been ac-
cepted and enforced as the law OF the State, is
! itself fraud.
| "Before the con testant, however, Is In po-
sition to assail that law before the committee
and the House he must show that the votes OF
persons qualified under the Consultation to
| vote were rejected to q number sufficient TO
| change the result. When he shows that the
votes of T94 persons who were possessed ap-
parently OF qualifications prescribed for vot-
| ers in the State Constitution were rejected,
he will then be in position TO be heard when
he complains OF the cause of such rejection.
The elections committee, no more than a
and opinions that would be obiter dIcla the
matter before them. There Is no occasion to
discuss the validity or invalidlty of the regis.
traLion law until the contestant shows that
under the Constitution OF the State he is en-
titled to a different result than the one OBJ.
tained. 1t is indeed remarkable that counsel
| for the contestant should have been guilty OF
such a radical fault In the taking OF testi-
mony to support heir case rs 10 omit to prove
the eligibility to vote under the requirements
| OF the Constitution OF the persons who, they
claim, were refused the elective franchise.
"They write up lists OF bare names and file
| them in the case, and then ask the committee
| to pass judgment on statute of the State.
Suppose the Committe should consider the
statute and should regard II invalid. Indeed,
| for the purposes of the argument and for the
| Simplifcation Of the case, let us admit that
the registration law is invalid, and In what
! position are we then? The Contestant Is ask
| ing that he be declared entitled to the seat.
Very well, let us now constitute the members
| of the Committee the managers OF the elec-
| tiou which IL Is necessary to hold here In Or
| der to revise the returns which have Ueen GER
titled 10 by the regular election officers of the
State. The Contestant says he has 5,OO0 ad-
herents and more, In the record who are will
ling and anxious 10 vote for him. Very we'll,
let them come forward with their ballots.
Remember they are all under challenge, for
the presumption is in favor Of the correct
ness of the official RETURNS and when the con-
testant comes here he comes with the burden
upon him to modify those returns. Let the
would be voters present themselves. The
frs, on the lis; page rs Is M; G. Brazman; l7nissd
States? Is he OF 81 years of age? Has he
lived one year within the State of South Car
olina? Has he lived G0 days within New
berry County? Has he ever been convicted
of perjury, Of forgery, or OF any other infa-
nous crime, or of duelling? Who answers
these questions? Brazman does not speak
for himself He nowhere appears In the rec.