The Washington weekly post., 1900-05-01
Fridays Proceedings.

Consideration was resumed by the SEN
ate Friday OF the resolution declaring
Nathan 3. Scott TO be entitled TO his seat
as a Senator from West Virginia. The
pending qUestiou was the motion OF Mr.
PetrVs 10 reCommit the resolution TO the
cOm.aittee. with instructions 10 invesu-
gate the case thoroughly.
Mr. Turner, Of Washington, while say
Ing he knew nothing OF the case except
what he had heard in course Of debate,
declared that # the facts were as stated
by Mr. Pettus il was clear 10 him. in view
OF his opinions OF the Constitution an1
statutes. that Mr. Scott was not entitled 10
his seat. He believed there had been du-
plicity. double dealing. and fraud In the
election OF Mr.. Scott. He particularly at
tackled the agreement which had been en-
tC red into by certain Democratic and Re-
publican leaders of the Legislature affect
ing the seats OF members Of the West Nir-
ginia house and senate, maintaining that
this presented such a state OF facts 10 the
United States Senate as would warrant IL
IN making a thorough investigation OF the
Scott case.
Mr. Chandler chairman OF the Commit
tee on Privileges and Elections, read some
remarks Of Mr.. Morgan. of Alabama,
made Friday in which he said the Ala
b. ma Senator seemed TO lean to the belief
that the Indiana case affecting the right
Of Senator TUrpie 10 a seat in the Senate
/ had not been decided correctly. Mr..
Chandler said If Mr.. Morgan really did be-
leve the TuTpie case was not decided cor
rectly and that II ought to be reversed,
he would stand with him. The decision in
that case was that the Senate should not
| reopen the determination of the legisla-
ture Of Indiana. He was willing TO have
the decision in the Turpie case reopened
IL the Democratic Senators were, and he
was satisfied Mr.. Scott could we'll stand
Oh the facts.
He gave warning that in the next Sen
ate the credentials of Mr. Blackburn, of
Kentucky, would be considered, and if the
doctrine established in the Turpie case.
which had been recognized as binding on
| the Senate, was to be Overruled, the Sen
ate would be called upon to go into the
question as to the competency Of the Fed
eral power to go back of the returns of a
duly and legally constituted legislature.
Mr.. Bacon, of Georgia, said that he be-
| lieved the majority report of the commit
| tee was based on sound law, and that the
| United States Senate could not enter into
an investigation of a legislatures right TO
| determine the qualifications Of its men,
| bers
| Mr.. Teller took ground similar to Mr..
| Bacon, holding that the doctrine accept
| ed as established by the decision in :he
| Turpie case was sound and safe.
In an extended statement of the effect
| of the agreement entered into Mr. Nc
I Comas, of Maryland, said that if the legis-
| lature of West Virginia had not taken
| the action ii did take with respect to the
| contests Of BTOhaTd and Morris and Kidd
| and Dent the effect would have been 10
! increase the majority Of Mr. Scott in the
! joint assembly instead of to decrease it
/ If the United States Senate. putting aside
| the doctrine established in the Turpif
case, should investigate the case and
| finally overturn the action of the legis-
| latuTe in respect to the seating of mem
bers named, it would result simply in in
| creasing the majority of Mr.. Scott. The
whole proceeding was regular and the
! Senate had, in his opinion, no power tC
| review the action of the legislature
| The r1o.iOn of Mr.. Pettus, that the re-
| pOr, ..-. -esOluIion be recommitted 10 the
committee for full investigation. was de-
| feated without division. The resOlutiO:
| of the committee declaring that Mr.. SCOU
| was entitled to retain his seat in the Sen
| ate was then adopted-52 to 3-the vote:
| in the negative being cast by Mes srs
| Morgan, Pettus and Turner. Mr.. Scott
| who was on the floor, was soon surround
ed by Senators extending their congratG
lations.