The Louisiana Democrat. [volume] (Alexandria, La.) 1845-1918, 1876-12-06
WlsHlsG gO1 CORRESPONDENCE,
VI ASHISGTON,
Nov. 30, 1S78.(


everybody seems to be reading. but
which, strange to say, no one seems
10 have read Through. 1t is as de.
void of meaning rs the title of that
celebrated one, Five Minutes in
China--.four quarto volumes" The
lasJ week has been one Of trial and
tribulation, especially to those unfor.
Inmates who have been sitting on the
"fence." A sitting position of that
kind is somewhat wearying on ones
nerves, and enough to make a man
eschew politics, join the church, and
live happy ever after.
The time seems to have come when
a more definite method Of counting
the electctal vote for President and
Vice. President should be adopted. -
It is not unlikely that the contest
may turn on the vote Of single
State, in which event, as fraud will
be charged by one party or the other,
everything will depend on the ques.
tiore whether the vote Of that State
shall be retained or thrown out -
The method Of counting the electoral
vote, and the proceedings of the Sen
ate and House of Representatives in
reference thereto, have heretofore
been prescribed by Rule % of the
Joint Rules Of the two Houses. No
Joint Rules having been adopted by
the first session Of the present Con
gress, the method and proceedings in
counting the electoral vote in Febru-
ary next remain to he determined by
the concurrent action and agreement
Of the two Houses at the next SEES
sion. Tie ODD Joint Rule provided
that if the two Houses disagreed on
counting the vote of any State it
should be thrown out. Under this
rule the process might be kept up
until no candidate had a majority OF
all the electoral votes, in which ease
the election would 90 into The House
of Representatives. 1t has been init
mated that the House. will now con
tend, should Hayes be elected, that
the Joint Rules are still in force. -
This is clearly a mistake; for joint
Rules cannot be joint Rules unless
agreed to By both Houses. This
view is sustained by the ex Journal
clerk of the House, john VI. Barclay,
the author OF Barclay Digest,
whose opinion on al! such subjects
H. regarded rs iufailih.e by pariia
mentarians OH both sides. None of
the Joint Rules being in force, it
therefore follows that either & new
rule for counting the vote mast be
slopted or the Constitution alone
must he the guide. In the latter
event the question will arise, "Shalt
the plain letter of tie Constitution
hr.followed- or will precedent gov
crnY" Tie New York Trihone
thinks that certain p-ece,tents fixed
hy usage may 90 far toward prevent
ing awkward and even dangerous
complications.
TIE RECORDS
show that the President Of the Sen
ate has never attempted to act as q
judicial officer in determining the va
lidity of a State vote; that while such
questions have invariably been re-
ferred to the two Houses Of Congress,
neither House has ever asserted it's
right to throw out State or choose
between two sets of returns, except
under the ODD Joint Rule, which
Congress has expressly omitted to
re-adOpt; that all disputes of this ma
ture have been decided by the two
Houses acting concurrently, though
they derived no authority to do so,
either from the Constitution or the
laws. But the President Of the Sen
ate may entertain the view that he
alone, under the Constitution, is yes
ted with the sole power of opening
and counting the votes, pointing to
that clause of the Constitution which
says that after the votes are opened
a they shall then be counted" The
consultation probably never contem-
plated the exigency of an objection
to counting the vote of any State,
and simply says "the votes shall then
be counted" 1t does not apparently
mean that he alone shall count them
rs reasonable to suppose, however,
IN the absence of the 22d Joint Rule
that all questions of this kind arising
would be referred to- the two Houses
ioF concurrent action, and that,
should a majority of both Houses
vote against throwing ont the vote of
any State, it would not he counted by