The Democratic advocate. [volume] (Westminster, Md.) 1865-1972, 1876-12-16
Counting the Electoral Vote.

| Tho Philadelphia Ledger, independent
with Republican prociyities, gives the follow
ing calm counsel, which if adopted would BIZ
infinitely preferable to plugging the country
into bloody revolution to determine who
shall be Presidents
| In the effort to adjust the controversy abou
the Presidential election there are severa
points that should be kept clear in the public
mind. Both sides claim the legal election OIL
their respective candidates; and each side
dispute and denies the legal election of the
candidate of the.other side. Here, then, il
a dispute about the law and equity Of the
case. Both sides should, therefore, be will.
ing and anxious to have the controversy sub.
mitted to legal inquiry under authority Of law,
and to decision by tribunal fully empowered
to inquire and decide. But, thus far, there
is but little evidence of a desire among the
recognized spokesman Of the two parties, or
on the part OF either of the two candidates,
to unite in the effort to provide such law and
such final and conclusive tribunal. Surely,
II both parties are confident that the law and
the right OF the case are on their side, there
should be no hesitancy about taking the me-
cessary steps towards securing the settlement
Of the controversy by means of legal investi-
CATION, before an authoritative tribunal speci.
ally appointed for the purpose. These are
the points to remember.
1t may be said, in response, that law al
ready exists, and that final tribunal is al.
ready provided by the Constitution for the
counting of the vote. But this is not the
fact. The Constitution simply provides that
"the President of the Senate shall, in the
presence of the Senate and the House of
Representatives, open all the certificates, and
the vote shall then be counted II is silent
as to who shall count the votes, and silent
also as to the tribunal and the manner for
deciding upon the validity of papers which
purport to be Electoral votes, but which may
not be valid Electoral votes at all. As to
this, we repeat, the Constitution is entirely
silent; and yet the decision of the recent
Presidential election depends upon the lawful
and equitable adjustment OF exactly these
points upon which the Constitution is SILENT
and for which the law.m making power has pre-.
yided no legal methods and no authoritative
final tribunal. 1t will not do, therefore, to
say that the Constitution provides the means
for the adjudication Of this controversy in any
conclusive way. Especially it will not do for
the Senate of the United States to say this,
for almost the entire membership of that body
are on record, Us recently as the last session
OF Congress, to the effect that the Constitu.
ton does not provide remedies fer case like
the present; and, more than that, they ere on
record 70 the effect that il is in the highest
degree perilous to the country 10 leave the
subject standing upon the naked words of the
Constitution, without law to decide as TO the
validity of papers purportiDg TO be Electoral
votes, and without law to guide and regulate
the proceedings during the counting of the
vote. Whomsoever else may be free to say
that the Constitution and the customs Of
eighty years under the Constitution provide
sufficient law and regulation, TIE United
States Senate cannot say that, for that body,
and the Senators on both sides, are estopped
from taking that position by their almost
unanimous expressions and actions to the
contrary at the last session. They may diff
fer about details Of remedies but they cannot
differ as to the fact of the threatening dangers
existing because Of the absence of law, and
the fact of the vital necessity for the enact.
ment of law to cover the case.
tits, therefore, the bounden duty of the
Senate to be addressing itself diligently to
the effort to provide law for the settlement of
this serious and dangerous controversy. 1t
is equally the duty Of the House, although
that body insists that the Twenty
Joint Rule is in force. Whether il be or
not, the House is informed now, and was Off
cially notified four moaths ago, that the Sen.
ate does not consider that joint rule or any
other joint rules to be in operation. That is
disputed and unsettled law, and leaves the
case about as much without legal regulation
as if there were no law at all, except the
meagre and insufficient words of the Consti-
tuition, which latter position is the one sub
stantially held by the Senate,
Instead, however, of finding the leading
IN a mi ara Of the t,un H,N,.a. .n1,,
triously and earnestly in the work of framing
a practicable and sufficient law, the whole
subject is drifting along the stream Of time,
at the mercy of chance, and at the risk OF
some dangerous conflict being brought upon
the country by the men who are engaged in
the invention of plans and devices and strata.
gems to get ahead Of each other and to defeat
each other, regardless Of the rights and the
law Of the case. Surely the American Sen.
ate, occupying its high position, and in the
face of its honorable and patriotic record
upon this very subject so recently as the
spring ofthe present year, surely that Senate
cannot remain content to leave..so dangerous
a contingency to drift about with no compass
and no pilot but chance.
We say this in full view of the proposition
of Senator Edmunds to so amend the Con,
stitutlon as to turn over the counting of this
present vote to the Supreme Court. That
we repeat, is fair proposition, and ought to
be entirely satisfactory, so far as the present
case is concerned. But who can expect that
it can possibly get through both Houses o.
Congress by two.thirds vote, and get the
ratification of three-fourths of the State Leg
| islatures before the second Wednesday o.
February There does not appear TO be
| even remote probability of such action
within that period.
| At the same time we do not see that any
tribunal except the Supreme Court or it,
Judges can be agreed upon Just now fof the
adjudication Of the legal controversies il
which the disputed Electoral votes are most
unfortunately involved. Every other device
yet mentioned would inevitably decide the
controversy beforehand and, therefore, is GU
Of the question as a feasibility. The Suprem,
Court or its Judges, specially empower ed
alone remain among the probabilities a
the case now stands. We do not believe tina
| il requires an amendment to the Constitution
to bring them to the aid Of the Senate an,
House Of Representatives, for the determine
fioa Of legal doubts about Electoral potes. A.
act of Congress would be quite sufficient, 70
such law would be for the execution of tn
Constitution, and for providing regulation b
law for the performance of duties by the tw
Houses in case where the Constitution i'm
poses the duty, but is entirely silent as to tn
mode of proceeding. Senator Morton, VIII
labored SO earnestly at the last session t
have law enacted to avert these very diff
culties and perils that now threaten the couu
try, proposed to amend his own bill so as t
call in the aid of the Judges of the Suprem
Court to consider and determine these pre-
else legal disputes.
| What or who stands in the way of the pai
sage of his bill with that amendment now
What method can be devised that promise
to be so satisfactory to the country, or tbs
will be acquiesced in with such willing OBJ
dience whether the decision be considere
right or wrong 7
| [Since the above was written the Edmund
proposition has failed.