The St. Louis Republic. [volume] (St. Louis, Mo.) 1888-1919, 1902-12-07
Richardson Reserved All Points of
Order Against Resolution
in Butler Contest.
SHARP BATTLE ANTICIPATED.
Buffers AdherentS Will Try to
Prevent Any Action Upon
the Case at This Ses-
sion of Congress.
The R.uIl.lEc Ru-cau.

~ ''i~!'illcSttt4. LET o-sN!Ivl ils distI 'Iit
House met to-day Chairman Olirsted sub
mitteL report from Elections COMMITTEE
No. ;. in the contested election case oi
Wagner vs.. Butler from St Louis.
Tne report states that the act Of Congress
of 1871 allows ninety days for taking testi
mony and sixty days for filing briefs. he
fore a contested case can he heard, which
would carry Ii beyond the life OF this ION
gr-ss. The report holes tha; the act of 1851
Is not binding upon the House. and recon-
mends the adoption of resolution allowing
fifteen days on each side for the taking OF
testimony. 50 that the may te pre-
sented for the decision OF this Congress
before March 3.
Mr. Olmsted gave notice that he would
call up the resolution for consideration
Wednesday. Mr.. Richardson OF Tennessee.
the democratic leader reserved ali points
OF order against the resolution. None Oh
the Democratic members of the committee
signed the report. aui Mr.. Richardson's ac-
ton gives notice tnat the Democrats wall
endeayor to prevent action upon the case
at this session.
Chairman omsted said this evening he
looks for d snd:p contest when the IaSe Is
called up, bat he thought the resolution
would be adopted
COMMITTEE REPORT.
Inc following Is the report Oh tNe CcNliiit-
tee and resolution offered to-day:
"A special election was held November =.
1902 to ill a vacancy existing in the Twelfth
Congressional District of Missouri. conpris-
ing the city of ST. Louis. The official fe-
turns showed that James J. Butler. the
Democratic nominee, had received 1854
votes: George c. r. Wagner. Republican.
I055f, and 257 votes for other candidates.
A certificate OF election was thereupon Is
sued to Mr.. Butler, who took the oath or
Office December l, 1902. and occupies 4 seat
as a member of the Fitty-seventh Congress.
Within the statutory period Mr.. Wagner
served upon Mr.. Butler a written notice of
contest, claiming that he, the said Wagner.
received a majority of the legal and valid
votes cast at the said election, and that
the election or pretended election of Butler
was the result Of stupendous and systematic
frauds extending throughout the entire dis
trict: tie judges and clerks re-
fused to receive and count legal and Va Id
ballots cast for the said Wagner; that
over ten thousand Illegal ballots were re-
ceived and counted by the judges for said
Butler which ballots had been cast by par
ties not entitled to vote for the reason that
they We're not residents of the district or
precinct in which they voted. or assumed
names of voters who were dead or who had
moved. or the places where they purported
to reside were vacant lots and because the
tered voters and not entitled to vote; that
two thousand duly qualified voters living in
said congressional district. who had there
torore duly registered. were wrongfully and
Illegally stricken from the registration Iist.
and although they appeared at their proper
voting places and prcfered their votes. the
officers of election refused tn receive tn I'M ::
that there were counted. cast up. returned
and credited to Mr.. Butler one hundred
fraudulent and Illegal votes in each OF nine
ty-seven specified precincts as the result Of
a conspiracy between judges and clerks OF
election: that in some precincts violence was
used to intimidate and eIpel Republican
violence was participated In by the
police of the city Of ST. Louis;
that the judges IN many OF the
precincts misconducted themselves and act
ed Illegally. and many other allegations of
fraud. misconduct and wrongful returns Of
votes all Of which II sustained by evidence
would probably show that Mr.. Wagner is
and certainly that Mr.. Butler is not en-
titled to a seat In this House.
CONTEST NOT FRIVOLOUS.
THE contestant presents a memorial en-
bracing a copy of said notice of contest
and accompanied by exhibits and affidavits.
which convince your committee that his
contest is not frivolous, nor without rea-
sonable grounds. and asking substantially
that such appropriate action may be taken
by the House as will make 1t possible that
the contest may be decided before the ex-
piration Of the term of the present Con-
gress. The Constitution OF the rnitel
States provides that Each House shall be
the Judge Of elections. returns and qualifi-
cations Of Its own members but if the
usual time for the taking of testimony
NINETY days. filing of briefs etc. (sixty
days.. Is consumed In this case, it cannot
reach the House for its Judgment during
the life of the Congress n vi oocb NJ
the contending parties claims to have been
elected, and. indeed. could not. had pro-
ceedings commenced on the very day of
election.
1T is true that the existing provisions
upon the subject of notice Of contest. an
swer of contestee, taking of testimony and
filing of briefs are contained in certain
statutes passed by both houses and ap-
proved by the President, February 10. 1851;
January II, 1873; March 2. 1885, and March
q. 1887. According to the practice which
seems to have prevailed Immediately prior
to the passage of the act of 1851 the taking
of testimony was not commenced until after
the contest had been presented at the first
session Of the Congress to which the parties
claimed to have been elected. or practically
one year and one month after the election.
1t to provide for the taking of tesu-
mony before the meeting of Congress and.
in short. to expedite rather than retard the
decision of such contests that the sta :utes
mentioned We're enacted. They were not
intended to deprive the House of the con-
stitutional privilege of judging of the cleo
ton of its members. as would be the case
in this instance and might he In many
others where elections to fill vacancies We're
held within six or eight months of the ex-
piration of the term of the Congress. And
even If SO intended would not he in so far
they tended to that result of any hind
Ing force and effect.
While these statutes contain many val
uabie provisions and in the main constitute
wise and prudent regulations for ordinary
contested election cases. we find abundant
precedent for disregarding them upon good
cause shown. Thus. in Benoit vs. Boatner,
1t appearing that If the statutory time for
the preparation Of briefs We're consumed
the case could not be reached by the House
for its action before its final adjournment
Speaker Reed referred the matter to this
committee. which reported. and the House
adopted a resolution directing this COM
mittee to proceed to the consideration Of
the case and report its conclusions in time
10 afford to the House an opportunity to de-
termine the same during the present ses-
sion of Congress-" Congressional Record
of January IA, 1887. PIP. s02 and Sl9)
I'm numerous other Cases the House ha 9
exercised its power to disregard for suf-
fcient cause. the act of 1851. and the latter
statutes upon the subject AMI we find none
in which slch power has been surrendered
denied by any action of the House
Your committee recommends adoption of
tho following resolution:
COMMITTEES RESOLUTION.
Resolved. That in the contested election
j. Butler from the Twelfth Congressional
District of Missouri. the contestee shall be
required to serve upon contestant his an
swer to notice Of contest on or before De
Cember 15. 1902 and that the time for TAX