The Rutland weekly globe. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1873-1877, 1874-03-13
HEPUBLsCAN EOEM or GOTEIsN-
rsEET


HHPUBLICAN FORM OF GOTEIgN-
rsESr.
senator Carpenter has closed the debate,
on his part on the bill ordering a new cleo
ton in Louisiana. The speech was in re-
ply to that of Senator Morton, and was, in
the main, restatemcnt or condensation Of
his former one, which embraced every AZ
eumcnt that could be brought TO bear upon
that side of the question. When we come
TO sift the whole matter, there are only two
grcunds-or rather one, which is made the
basis for the other-upon which 1t IS at
tempted TO justify the ordering of new
election, and upon which the legality and
cOnstitutionality Of the measure Is based
The first of thesc-thc one under which the
other is buit-is that there was 10 legal
election held in Louisiana in November
1872. With this is, also, involved the
proposition that there was no legal and
proper counting of the votes. Upon this
proposition everyone is substantially agreed
Republicans and democrats here, stand on
the same ground. If there had been le-
gal election, followed by a proper counting
of the votes, there would have been no
contest or controversy. The first trouble
arose in the election, the next, and perhaps
the most important one, or most important
part of the same trouble, in the attempt
made by Governor Warmoth to have the
votes. or what pretended to be returns OF
votes. counted by an alleged illegal board.
Warmoth's board went through with pro
tended count, ard certified that McEncry
and others were elected to certain offices.
The other board took similar course and
certified that Kellogg and others were elect.
- on,oV-. 'rnn ae,,'s'~ 80 49,"
state, having full jurisdiction Of the mat
ter, decided that the latter board were the
legal aboard of state canyasscrs." It fol-
lowed, therefore, that their certificates
were primd .tacic evidence Of cleo.
ton, and that Kellogg and Others
were the proper incumbents of the
rlared to have been elected. BY an order
of the now notorious Dumell, the Kellogg
legislature obtained possession of the proper
rooms and organized as such. The Nc
Emery legislature organized elsewhere.
Here, then, were two bodies claiming to
be the legislature, and two individuals claim
ing to be tile governor, and the President
was called upon to recognize the one or the
other. This was a duty imposed upon him
by the constitution and the Laws, and he
could not shirk it. He recognized the Kcl.
logg government, and we do not see how
he could have done otherwise. He could
have known nothing of any malfeasance oil
corruption on the part of Durrell. He coulc
have known nothing to the discredit of the
supreme court of Louisiana He must act
at once, and he was bound to act upon tho
best light he could obtain. He followed
the decisions of the state and United Satcs
courts of Louisiana, and the certificate of the
board of state canvassers. Could he have
done otherwise, under the circumstances
We think not The same Illegally at
tached to the election of one as to the other.
Neither is, or perhaps could be, of right tho
government of Louisiana. The Kellogg
government is the de ytitct0 government. II
must be remembered, moreover that the
matter of these frauds were not as fully un-
derstood then as now. There was not then
rs now, "A concession of Illegally on both
sides.
There were three courses for the Prcsi
dent to pursue, only one Of which was
legal and constitutional-he could have
recognized one party as the de Jacto govern.
ment, have ordered now election, or APP
pointed military governor and taken arm
ed possession of the state. The first was
legal and proper, the others would have
been illegal and acts of usurpation. lie
chose the proper, legal and constitutional
course, Upon the conceded .illegality OF
the election, the pretended canvas Of tho
votes on both sides, and the fact that Kel
logg is de tdctO governor of the state by Tho
recognition of the President, is based thu
main argument. 1t stands with the con
stitutional provision that A" the Unitet
States shall guaranty.to every state in thu
Union a republican form Of government.
From the admitted state of facts in Louis
lana, he argues that they have not n ''re
publican form of government" because tn
government was not elected by the people
We understand him to say that the SAM
result would have followed if the Presiden
had recognized McEDery and his legisla
ture as the de .tactO government of the state
The whole force of his argument may b,
summed up as follows That If an election
Is so tainted with fraud, that its declared
results give to state governor and othe
state offices not elected by the people, thel
that state has not REPUBLICAN form o
government" and that II is the duty o
Congress, under the clause of the constitu
ton quoted, TO order new election.
his argument means anything and leads t
any result, 1t is this. The only fact upoi
which II Is claimed there should he a new
election is that the last one was so taintet
with fraud that the true expression Of TN
honest voters was not and could not be as
certained. The only power claimed TO
Congress to so provide is derived from tn
one clause of the constitution. What woul'
he the logical result of the passage of sucl