The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1900-01-29

doubtless, as would be any other issue
which gentlemen choose to lug In, hut
which the United States senator may
not properly inquire into-just as effec-
tive. for example. as statement Of the
reasons The Democrats had for enter
ing into, and even proposing, a settle
ment by compromise OF the differences
over the contested seats. The McGraw
forces believed they knew 10 dead
certainty that three Republicans would
decline to vote for Mr.. Scott, and that.
even with the loss of two votes, they
could prevent his election, protract
the contest until the close of the ses-
sion, and !eave the state with but one
senator until other provision could be
made for filling the vacancy. 1t was
only when they discovered their mis-
take that the cry of illegality was
raised.
The contention concerning the Pier
son and Getzendanner votes was fully
met in the brief filed by ex-senator
Faulkner. Senator scott's attorney. the
greater part Of which was printed in
the Iutelllgencer in December.
Judge Holt argued that the United
States has the right to go behind the
returns and investigate the case by
taking evidence as tc the matters he
alleged. II this connection 1t may be
stated the counsel for senator Scott
showed that there was cause for the
suspension OF the two members OF the
legislature who were denied the right
to vote or the genatorIal question; that
Senator Scott received the votes Of a
majority Of all the members elected
and qualified, according to the judg-
ment Of both houses"
A Case in Point.
A decision bearing upon the case is
cited. 1t was in contest before the
United States senate. when Senator
Hill. of Georgia, in making the report,
said:
THE third ground alleged was that
there was not majority of the whole
legislature actually voting for the
members chosen. In our opinion that
is not necessary. There was a quorum
of each house present in the joint as
sembly; there was majority Of that
quorum actually voting for the mem-
bers chosen. In our opinion that was
valid election"
This, 1t will be seen, is similar con-
tentIon TO that in Senator scott's case,
and 1t is answered.
Further along in the report Senator
Hill lays down this principle; That
when the question Of membership in
the Legislature is to be proved to the
senate there is but one Of two ways In
which II can be done:
"one is the possession OF lawful ere
dentlals. The other is the Judgment of
the house itself, not only the final, but
the sole Judge of the elections, quail
ficatlons and returns of It's members"
Rests on Rumors.
In concluding his argument Senator
Faulkner said:
.'The other objection alleged to the
right of Senator Scott 10 his seat rests
upon rumors, assertions OF individual
members and others, of what would be
the probable action Of one house II the
other did not comply with certain con-
ditIons will, II the occasion ever de-
,,,pnds II be fully met and completely
overthrown.
I'VE feel confident that the senate
win not under the numerous prece-
dents 1t has established, begin at this
late day in its history to exercise the
right OF an appellate tribunal to re-
view the formal proceedings Of II legal
ly organized legislature of a state and
reverse its action, taken by virtue Of
authority conferred upon 1t by the con-
stitution of the state. and to determine
for the legislature OF West Virginia.
who constituted the membership Of the
respective houses Of said legislature
which elected Hon. n. B, Scott on the
25th day Of January. 1899. nor do we
believe that where the action oil the
legislature Is within It's Jurisdiction
that the senate OF the United States
will inquire into or permit any investl-
CATION of The motives which Influenced
and directed the action OF Itss members
as to matter clearly within the ex-
ercIse of their legislative power
The principal aim of the speakers was
to induce the committee to order an In
vestigation and go to the expense Of
taking testimony on the questions out
lined in the addresses.