Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1900-01-12

tWSAx0 90A44G&A<S5 44MH 8uAR 4At J44AAS
assembly with = majority. and elected
e Republican Senator by 9 majority q
one. They could have completely over
thrown the Will Of the people and
made a Democratic Legislature, Re
publican. This was precisely what
was done, except that they only need
ed one, instead OF Twelve votes. II the
claimant is seated it will establish a
precedent by which q large majority OF
either party in either house OF any
legislature can, by simply suspending
members or ousting them, control the
election of United States Senators.
The State Senate or West Virginia
recognized that r. F. Kidd had never
been lawfully deprived Of his right to
act as a Senator by not requiring him
to again be qualified, and by paying
him for the full term. This is one Of
the questions of fact relating to the
qualification, election and returns OF
the members, of which the State Sen
ate was the judge, and the State Senate
has judged that r. F. Kidd was a Sen
ator from the day the Legislature met
up to the present time, and will be a
State Senator until the expiration OF
his term of Office. The State Senate,
therefore, deliberately provided by its
separate resolution carrying into effect
the compromise agreement, that r. F.
Kidd be restored to his position as
Senator with his contest pending as it
had been pending as 1t had been pend
ing, and that he had ben prevented
from voting upon n subject and one
subject only. If the Senate could, by
resolution, provide that one Senator
should not have the privilege OF vot-
ing upon any particular subject, 1t
could provide that two Senators
should have a limited disfranchise, or
that all the Senators of a particular
party should be disfranchised in the
election of a United States Senator. A
Legislature cannot pass a valid resolu-
ton which would be unconstitutional
if enacted into a law. If a Democratic
Legislature was to provide by statue
that no Republican member of the
Legislature should ever have the right
to vote for United States Senator, there
is no court in Christendom that would
uphold the statute. And yet, that Is
precisely what the Senate of West Vir-
ginia attempted to do by resolution in
the Kidd case.
In all cases of fraud, intimidation or
duress, the United States Senate has
taken hold of the question with a firm
and relentless hand and acting In an
bipartisan way has probed every such
case to the bottom. In the Turpie case
the Senate made an express exception
of all such cases. In several of the
reconstruction cases the United States
Gcooto oron vyont infn nrpCtinnS Of
fact as to the election Of members of
the Legislature. There was not one Of
these reconstructed cases any more
fragrant than the case in hand. Here
were seven holdov2r Senators, and as
to the reelection Of some Of them
there was a considerable doubt. The
Republicans held the State government
and a considerable majority in the
State Senate. They wanted one more
vote and in order to secure it, it was
necessary for them to illegally eject
one of these Senators, and If o
votes were needed, they openly assert
ed that they intended to eject all the
Senators necessary to accomplish their
purpose. The opposing party could Sc
cure no compromise, and were prevent
ed by the Republican Attorney-Gensral
fEosn obtaining legal redress. They
were compelled to submit to any con-
ditions which might be imposed, in or
der to hold the advantage which the
people had given them at the polls in
these Senatorial districts. There was
never a more revolutionary proceeding
threatened than that in Charleston.
The Acknowledgement of the State
said in an argument to the committee
on privileges and elections that unless
that committee did his bidding, the
State militia would be called out and
sisted that all these questions have
been settled by the conspiratorS them
selves and that as the c~onspirators are
satisfied with the result, the United
States Senate has no right to enquire
into it.
The remonstrants presented docu-
mentary evidence OF fraud. conspiracy,
and intimidation. They do not ask the
United States Senate to investigate
mere loose charges, but they are sur
prised at the contention Of the claim
ant that the United States Senate has
no right to hear evidence upon the
question of fraud and duress, because
the fraud was committed by a State
Legislature, and the State Legislature
has ratified the fraud. And yet, upon
the face Of the papers presented here,
it Is shown that foTty-eight members
Of the Legislature voted for Nathan B.
Scott, and f%orty-nine members did not
vote for him and demonstrated against
his being seated. Which constitutes
the Legiclature-the forty-eight mem
bers who are satisfied with the fraud,
or the forty-nine members who pro-
test against it?
A joint convention was held under
n4MvfraHanIent private agreement
and not under the statute which
the election void.
Under the terms Of the compromise
agreement, one Senator, whom the
State Senate admitted by q resolution
spread upon the records of that body,
was suspended solely for the purpose
of affecting the election Of a Senator,
and one Delegate whose case was con-
Guided and who was entitled to a vote,
were prevented from voting in the
Joint assembly. This private agree,
ment denied two men the right to vote
when they were not even parties to the
agreement.
All agreements interfering with the
normal conduct Of an election are OPP
posed to public policy and wholly void
and votes thereby obtained must be re-
jected,
State VS.. Pardy, So Wis, 43.
Ga. Co1J,- IAEn