The Hartford herald. [volume] (Hartford, Ky.) 1875-1926, 1876-12-20

fact be shown against the certificate,
which proves it to be not merely err
roneOus, but void. If the vote comes
up from body of men pretending to
be electors, but who in truth have new
er been appointed as such according to
the laws of the State, their acts must
certainly be treated as nudity. Men
can not constitute themselves electors
nor be constituted by anybody else ex-
cePt the proper appointing power.
Suppose the power of appointment to
be in the Legislature. The Legisla-
ture, in the prescribed manner and at
the proper time, makes its appoint
ment by clear majority of its votes,
which are duly recorded and certified
by its officers. Yet the governor, not
only without the consent of the Legi,-
lature, but in defiance of its expressed
will to the country, fixes up a differ
/
ent set of men as an electoral COL
lege, and gets them to cast their
vote as the vote of the State.
Is there an honest man in the
country who would be willing to pro-
mote the object of such a proceeding
by counting the vote of such pretend
ed electorsr The case under consider
alton is precisely analogous to this.
Here the power to appoint is in the
people who have exercised it; their
votes are counted and recorded decis-
lively showing their designation of GER
tain persons as their appointees. But
the governor dishonesty takes upon
himself and seven associates the duty
of voting for president in the name of
the State. If this be not a mere bO-
gus college of electors what would it
be! If these men can cast the vote of
the State what is to hinder any other
eight men from doing the same thing {,
The right of Congress to throw out
the vote of persons not duly appointed
has never been denied in cases of Ter
ritories not fully admitted as
States, or of States supposed to be out
of the Union a. consequence of their
rebellion. If you reject the votes of
electors because the State could not ap-
point, q tortiOri, you must reject the
votes of electors whom the State could
appoint but did not. And the princi-
pie applies muIto tortiori to the case
of persons to whom the appointing
power expressly refused the trust and
bestowed it on others. Indeed no alb
surdity could be more palpable. and
none could lead to worse consequences
than decision that the voice of a
State must be taken as it is thrown by
any set Of persons who claim to do it
without regard to the authority which
they hold or the source from whence
they derive it. If that principle pre-
walls, what is to be the predicament
of things when two or three or a dozen
sets of electors all claim the right to
vote, and all send up their certificates
in apparently proper form, and all are
laid before Congress by the president
of the Senate?
1t will certainly not be denied that
Congress msyinquire into the genuine
ness of any certificate produced by the
president of the Senate. lift is known
to be mere forgery all men ofcommon
integrity will say with one voice that it
must not and shall not be counted.
That be settled, let US see what follows
in the case under consideration.
Forgery is the fraudulent making or
alteration of a writing to the prejudice
of another's right. If the Returning
Board and governor of Louisiana will
fully, fraudulently, and falsely makea
certificate that certain persons therein
named had majority of the popular
votes, knowing the fact to be otherwise,
they bring themselves literally within
this definition. The books on criminal
Law teach that an indictable forgery is
proved when paper, though signed by
the hand of the proper person, and not
afterward altered, is brought into con-
tact with any trick or imposture prac-
ticed by or upon the maker of it.
Thus, a note for thousand dollars,
signed by an illiterate man on the as
surance that it binds him to pay only
five hundred; will drawn contrary to
instructions and misread to the testator;
deed antedated with the consent of
both parties to affect injuriously the
rights of others-these are held to be
forgeries by all the text writers on
criminal law from Coke to Wharton.
The judicial decisions, however, IN
England and America are not uniform