Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1897-01-09
JONES VS. STRAIT.
Grounds of Contest In the
Fifth District.
NEW ELECTION LAWS ATTACKED.

It Is Claimed ThaC q Large NunDeF VI
Citizens Were Illegally Denied the
Right to Vote.
Congressman Strait and his attor-
ney, w. B. Wilson, have favored the
Rock Hill Herald with copy of the
letter in which Major John F. Jones
notifies DR.. T. J. Strait of the grounds
upon which DR.. Straits seat in con-
gress is to be contested. The letter,
which is we'll worth careful perusal,
is as follows:
To the Honorable T. j. Strait, returned
as member of the Fifty-fifth congress
from the Fifth congressional district OF
South Carolina:
Please take notice that shall contest
your pretended election as representative
10 the Fifty-fifth congress Of the United
States, upon the following grounds:
First. That the registration for electors
for the election on November 3rd, 1885, for
representative to the Fifty-fifth congress
from the Fifth congressional district OF
South Carolina was held pursuant 10 the
provisions of article II, sec. and OF the
constitution of South Carolina OF 1895 and
tie act of the general assembly OF Soutn
Carolina, approved March 3, 1896, and tnat
said provisions of the said constitution
and the said act of the general assembly
are in conflict with the act Of congress,
approved June 26th, 1868, whereby the
state of South Carolina was admitted To
representation in congress on the tunda.
mental condition that the constitution OF
South Carolina, adopted and ratified in
1858, should never be so changed or
amended as to deprive any citizen or
class of citizens of the United States
of the right to vote in said state VINO
are entitled to vote under the constl-
tuition of said state then in force; that
the said provisions Of the said con-
stitution of South Carolina Of 1873 and the
said act Of assembly approved March o,
1896, undertake to deprive citizens OF this
state entitled to register and vote under
the constitution Of South Carolina OF
1868, of the right of registration and sut-
frage, and are, therefore, null and void,
and that the boards Of registration OF the
various counties in said district, claiming
to act under the said provisions OF the
constitution of South Carolina of 1885 and
of said act of assembly March 5, 1895,
refused to register large number
of citizens of this state, to-wit, more
than 10000, who were qualified and
entitled under the constitution Of South
Carolina of 1868, to register for vote at
said election OF November Sd, 1896. in said
district, for representative to the 55th con-
eress, and who, if they had been allowed
to register, would have registered and
would have voted for the contestant,
John F. Jones.
Second. That the managers OF election
of the various precincts in said district,
claiming to act under the provisions OF
article II, sections and 6, OF the constitu-
ton of South Carolina of 1895, and the act
of assembly of South Carolina, approved,
March 5th, 1896, (Which said provisions of
said constitution and said act OF assembly
are i'm conflict with the act OF congress
approved June 26, 1868, and therefore null
and void,) refused to allow a large num-
ber of citizens Of this state, to wit, more
than 5000, to vote at said election OF NO
vember Sd, 1896, in said district, for rep
resentative of the Fifty-fifth congress,
and register the ballots of said citizens,
who are qualified and entitled under the
constitution of this state of 1868 to vote in
said district for said representative, and
who, if they had been allowed to vote,
would have voted for said contestant.
Third. That all the provisions OF the
constitution proposed for the state OF
South Carolina by the constitutional con-
vention of 1895 (which constitution is
commonly known as the constitution OF
South Carolina of lS95) providing for the
registration and qualification Of electors,
cannot have the force and effect of law,
and are null and void, on the ground that
the proposed constitution has never been
ratified by the people of this state and the
people of this state have never delegated
to the convention framing the same the
power to impose constitution upon them
without referring it back for ratification,
and contestant further alleges that the
provisions of the act of assembly OF this
state, approved March 9TH, 1896, for the
registration of electors, is in conflict with
the provisions of the constitution of this
state of 1868, respecting the rights of suf-
frage, and that the boards of registration
of the various counties Of said district,
claiming to act under the proposed con-
stitution of 1895 and the said provisions
of the said act of assembly, refused to
register large number of citizens of this
state, to- wit, more than 10000, who were
qualified and entitled under the constitu-
ton of this state of 1868, to register for
and vote at said election of November 3rd,
1896. in said district, for representative to
the Fifty-tifth congress, and who, if they
had been allowed to register, would have
registered and would have voted for con-
teStant.
Fourth. That the boards Of managers
oe ho ,,or;o,c rollipn r,roripcts in said