Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1899-12-02

Senate, he did not thereby vacate his
seat as State Senator, and might vote
!. in the joint assembly. He did so and
his vote made the necessary majority
to elect Dupont, just as the votes OF
Getzendamer and Pierson made the ne
ceSsary majority for Scott. The United
States Senate in that case passed upon
the question of the eligibility of the act
ing Governor to vote in the joint as
semly as a Senator, decided that under
the constitution OF Delaware he had
no such right, and refused to receive
Dupont as Senator. There Is wlde
distinction between the right OF
branch of the Legislature to pass upon
the election OF its members and It's
right to determine whether or not
vacancy exists in it's body under the
constitution of the State. In the one
case it is a question of fact involving
the details OF an election and returns.
In the other it is question OF the
construction OF constitutional pre-
vision under which. as the Senate
said in the Dupont case, its action
determines great constitutional
rights-the title OF an individual to
high ONCE AMI the title of Sow
ereign State to be represented in
the Senate by a person OF its choice,
in which case 'sthe Senate is to de-
clare a result depending upon the
application Of law to existing facts,
and is net to be affected by the de-
sire OF its members or by their opin-
ions as to public policies or public
interest" In other words. while
the State Senate might have unseat-
ed Kidd. who was elected, and given
his seat to Morris, who was net elect
ed, and the United States Senate would
refuse to inquire into the facts Of thai
action or take cognizance of the fraud
involved in it. on the theory that the
State Senate was the sole judge OF the
qualification, election. and returns Of
its members. when a question CT law
arises affecting the eligibility Of mem
beers under the contitution whose votes
give title to an individual to high
Office" that body will inquire into the
law OF the matter. and if it be found
that they were ineligible, as the acting
Governor Of Delaware, was found to be
ineligible, it will refuse to give Scott
seat, as it refused to give Dupont seat,
in that body. AS to whether or not
Getzendanner and Pierscn vacated their
seats by accepting commissions in the
army, there has never been question
among lawyers on that subject. Even
the Governor and every Republican
lawyer in the Senate will admit. If
pressed to that point, that it was only
party exigency that made it possible
for those Senator's to be received back
in. the Senate after having clearly va
Gated their Senatorial Offices under sec
lion IS of article 6 OF the State consti-
tuition.
The third point alleges that the vote
Scott received was brought about by
threats and intimidation upon the part
of Republicans in the Senate, who
threatened to throw out, illegally and
without cause, several Senators duly
elected by the people, unless the Demo-
Gratis of the House should accede TO
their demands, and that by reason OF
these threats, and in consequence of a
partial carrying out of the same by the
unseating of r. f. Kidd, in order to
prevent the disfr9nchisment of these
Senatorial districts, the Democrats
went, under duress, into the joint con-
vention.
The testimony filed with the brief not
only fully substantiates this allegation,
but shows that there was deep laid
on the part OF the State adj
ministration, the Senate, and number
of Republican members of the House,
to compel the regular organization of
the House to abandon its constitutional
right to try its election contests on
-,
Democratic Senators thrown out, a
house organized, and the regular or
ganization of the House dispersed by
force If necessary. Thus was one indie
pendent part of a coordinate branch
of State government coeced into
abandoning it's rightful privileges, and
robbed of power given it by the con-
stitution to settle its own election
contests. All the principles of fair
election for United States Senator
were subyerted by this conspiracy and
the threats and show of force which
accompanied it. The citations in sup
port OF the invalidity OF an election
under such circumstances are numer-
GUS and show conclusively that such
fraud and intimidation vitiate the cleo
ton.
The fourth point alleges that the
agreement entered into between few
Republicans of the Senate and DEM
ocrats of the House by which 1T was
agreed that the seats of Senator Kidd
and Delegate Dent should remain va
cant until after the election for Sena-
tor, and which agreement was ratified
by both Houses, was void as against
public policy, and Initiated said election
and ali acts done under 1t.
An acquiescenee in this agreement
was necessary on the part of the DEM
ocrats to preserve the seats of their
hold over Senators, but it is stated in
the brief that "All authorities agree
that an agreement of this nature is
void, as against public policy, and
and that all acts done under it are alb
solutely void. There has never been
such a case brought before the United
States Senate, but similar cases in prin-
ciple have been decided in the House
of Representative and in the Courts
of the country, and never yet has such
an agreement been held valid or an cleo
ton held under such an agreement
been sustained. To hold that one Sen
atorial district and one county can be
be deprived of their vote under pri-
vate agreement, ratified by the two
Houses, would be to hold that all coun-
ties and all Senatorial districts could
be disfranchised and the election held
entirely under private agreement rat