Smyrna times., 1901-01-16

the Legislature for the Representa-
tive from the Second District was
thrown out of the Legislature on
Wednesday of last week IN
iiffy the point being a technicality
little better than the technicality which
Judge Grubb and others figured in and
which led to the famous " Kent
County Steal in 1895. The object of
Mr.. H. d. Learned was to find out
whether he or John L. ScOtten got the
most votes, and abide the result to
ballot.
The Wilmington San reviews the
result of the contest in the following
pungent style:
''The Democrats of the Legislature
have resorted again to the returning
board tactics of 1896. They have lodged
the question in the Learned-ScOtten
contest secured decision upon tech
nical point of what they claim is the law
and have at the same time shown very
conclusively that they are afraid of an
investigation involving the opening of
the ballots. This manifest fear is we
suggest very much like confession of
guilt. Mr.. Scotch the Democrat in
this case is the Mr.. Scotch who fig
ured as a member of the Kent county
return board which attempted to fall
sify the returns of Kent county in
1S96-one of the projectors of and part
icipant in the political theft of the
State of that year. 1t is apparently
apropos that in this case the man and
the methods should be of like political
genesis-the genuiness of their Dem
Ocracy is beyond doubt"
The question raised by Mr.. Learned
in his notice of contest has not been
settled. That question is an import
ant one involving a vital principle in
all good politics and government. 1t
is virtually the question raised and
settled as all good citizens supposed in
the suit and decision of the mandamus
case relative to the legislative vote Of
Kent county in 1896. In that case the
people we're not interested in the tech
nical points raised by the Court or by
counsel for the defendant. Those
questions like those raised now related
only to methods of procedure. The
people then did not care whether re-
turns had been made from all the elec-
tion districts of the county or not but
what they wanted to know was which
political party had won the election
and who were the men who had been
elected to membership in the Legis
lature.
The Democratic methods adopted
then we're intended to prevent the lega
and Judicial decision of that matter
The method adopted in the Scooter
cases is the same. MrLearned charges
that Mr.. Scotten's certificate of elec
tion IS fraud, that Scotteu was no
and that he Learned was constitution
ally elected to membership in the Del
aware House if Representatives TIL,
constitution demands a majority o.
votes. The majority is claimed for
Learned. The ballots have been pre-
served as required by the law for tn,
settlement of just such disputes. Nh
Learned appeals to that ballot not upoI
any Statue law regulating the detail 0
gal proceeding but his reliance upo
constitutional rights and upon the con
stitutional authority Of the House, ct
Judge of the qualifications and electio
OF lis own members. No statute la
is Of sufficient force to invalidate ths
constitutional right of the House nc
yet can any statute law rightfully {
honestly deprive Mr.. Learned of h
constitutional rights in the case. II
failure if he did so fail to meet IL
letter of the law in filing his notice
contest does not justify Mr.. Scotte
in retaining a seat in the House
which he was not elected nor does al
such failure on the part of Mr.. Lea
ned disprove truth of what he alleg
IN his brief. The question is ST
open.
In this case as in all others the co
stitution precedes and when necessa
supplants, the statute law. The co
stitution provides that the Houses
the Legislature shall each be t
judges of the qualifications and eli
ton Of its own members. The s5atr