Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1900-04-12

| elected by the Senate and voted for
Scott.
| But if it were admitted that the State
| Senate were absolutely the judge of the
| elections and qualifications of its mem
bers, and that their decision could not
be investigated elsewhere, still the rec
ord shows that in the case of Kidd the
| State Senate did fraudulently and lille
gally suspend Kidd who was duly
| elected a Senator and received a GER
| tificate of election, and was duly sworn
and admitted to his seat, and after
wards, on January %, 1899, the Senate
| passed resolution, not as to his cleo
| ton or qualifications, not that he was
not elected not that his opponent, Nor
| ris, was elected, but the Senate resolv-
ed in substance, without authority,
that Morris should occupy Kidds seat
| pending the contest-a fraudulent de-
vice, entirely outside of any pretense
of authority, for the purpose of secur-
! ing the election of Mr.. Scott to seat
| in this Senate.
! Remember that all of the members
! of both houses were 81, and on the
vote as counted Scott received 48, Nc
Graw 46, and Golf /. Getzendanner
and Pierson, Senators only by the
| fraudulent action of the Senate, voted
| for Mr.. Scott, and Kidd was prevented
| from voting against Scott by the revo-
lutionary and fraudulent contrivances
of the Senate in suspending Kidd with
out any cause stated and without any
authority to do SO; for no man will
! dare to contend that any legislative
body in any one of the United States
has the authority to suspend member
without cause or evidence.
If you once establish such doctrine,
| the inevitable result will be anarchy.
For, unfortunately for this country,
men like Governor Atkinson, Secretary
of State Dawson, and Collector White
are to be found to invent plans of
fraud; and bold men like Attorney
General Rucker may be found to
threaten bloodshed on plans formu-
lated" even when addressing legisla-
tive committee as lawyers. And he
the States chief law officer!
The Senate of the State, for cause,
| and by two-thirds vote, could expeI
a member, or by majority vote could
decide contest after hearing, but who
so bold as to assert that the Senate
had authority without any cause, to
! suspend a member pending a contest
! for his seat? And that contest in this
| case was merely fraudulent pretense,
| invented by the Governor and his as
sociateS, in champertous and fraudu-
! lent conspiracies, to institute contests
| and pay "all costs and expenses
against the peace and dignity of the
State"
| Kidd S case, when he was suspended,
! was before a committee of the Senate,
and that committee had sent for and
obtained certain ballots, but never af-
! forwards asked for or received any
other evidence. And the Senate, after
/ Mr.. Scott was declared elected, unani-
mously declared that Kidd was elected.
And peace was again blessing in
! Charleston.
But it is insisted that Kidd and Dent
were suspended by agreement That
agreement was, in itself, an Illegal
and void contract, and against public
| policy. And the purpose of the Senate
to elect Mr.. Scott by fraud is clearly
shown by giving Morris Kidd's seat
pending the contest, and allowing Nor
ris to vote for Scott on the Oath of
| January when the houses voted sep
arately.
The following authorities cited by
counsel demonstrate that the action of
the Senate in suspending Kidd from
his seat, and the agreement made by
five Republicans of the Senate and five
Democrats of the House of Delegates.
conSenting to the suspension of Kidd
and suspending Dent of the House, was
illegal and void, and yitiated the pre-
tended election of Mr.. Scott, which was
the result of such fraudulent prac-
tees.
McCreary on Elections, 149, Isl, 1S5,
1856.
State VS.. Purdy, 36 Wis, 40.
Tucker VS.. Allen, n H., 140.
lansing VS.. Carpenter, 20 n. Y, 44F.
People VS.. Maynard, 10 Mich, III.
Alvord VS.. Collier, 20 Pick, rs.
Cooley's Con. Lin. GIG.
In 1873, in the special session, there
was a great debate OF this question
here raised, in the Caldwell case. II
appeared that Caldwell had bought of
his competitors and spent other money
improperly, and afterwards Caldwell
was regularly elected.
In that debate Senator Salisbury
said:
What is meant by the authority con-
ferred upon each house of Congress
to judge of the election OF it's mem
bers? 1t is something distinct from
judging of their qualifications and the
returns of elections. II must mean
that you may look into the election and
judge not only whether it took place
at the proper time and at the proper
place and by the proper legislative
body flor these facts must appear on
the face of the returns), but also TO
see if the election was conducted in
the proper manner; that is, whether it
was the free expression of the legisIa-
tive will, uncontrolled and undeterred
by force or fraud" 900
And Senator Morton, in the same
case, said:
IF the Senate can not inquire into
the circumstances attending the cleo
ton of its members, whether such
election was procured by bribery, cor
ruption. or other matter impairiug thu