New-York tribune., 1876-12-05

abOut setting off two wrongs against each
other for the establishment of one right mas
so far come from Republicans, who, taxing IL
for granted before hearing the testimony that
there was or would be crookedness OF somo
sort in Louisiana, have set 1t OIL against DEM
ocratic practices In NewYork and elsewhere,
and justified it as policy OF retaila,'oh' DuO
within few days some of the purlsts III poii-
tics. who have, as we believe, prejudged the
whole case in Louisiana, and satisfied them
selvcs that the Vote of the State does not
honestly belong to Hayes and Wheeier'
have come forward with plan to estao-
Isb truth and fair dealing by treachery
and dishonesty. They say the vote OF Lou
isiana has been fairly given for Tildep, but
that he has been cheated out of it by the
Returning Board This, they assert, Is so
patent fact as to justify any CONSCIENTIOUS
Republican eector in any State-say Prof.
Lowell of Massachusetts-in casting his vote
for Mr.. Tilden, or for some other candidate
than Gov. Hayes, so that the rascanty
suspected, not proved. OF the Louis
lana Returning Board may be defeated
of its object. The call has actually
been made upon some Republican elector 10
pursue this course 1t is perhaps significant
Of the difference between the two parties that
such an appeal in the supposed interest OF
truth and fair dealing should be made to Ke-
publican electors. 1t indicates feeling IN
the public mind that the representative men
of that party NAV be trusted to consider fairly
and c0nscientiousy any proposition TO DO JUS
tice. though at the sacrifice of party success III
is not too much to say that were the SITUATION
reversed no such appeal to the instincts OF
honesty and honor of Democratic electors
would be thought of for moment. Since
Mr.. Grecley's appeal to Mr.. Tilden to pre-
vent the consummation of gross and gigantic
frauds was disregarded by the person to whom
it was addressed, and derided by the party,
there has been no deusion IN the public mind
on that score. But the present proposition
seems to us TO involve strange moral
obliquity and perversion of Judgment.
1t certainly needs no argument to prove that
such action on the part of Republican cleo
tor would be trcachcry to the party that
elected him. The elector has no discretion III
the matter. Whatever may have been the de-
sign of the authors of the system OF Electoral
Colleges, or whatever the practice in the
earlier DAYS of the Republic, nothing is more
certain than that precedent and usage, which
are the unwntten law, as binding as
any statute upon the honor: OF the
eector, have limited his functions to the
merely formal expression of the Will oi the
voters who elected him. He is simply the
trustee of their vote, the instrument by when
the expression of their choice is giyen-nothlng
more. Under our practice a majority OF the
voters of a State, who have previously indi-
Gated beyond question the precise duty he is
to perform have selected him to act for them
in the discharge of that duty, and only that.
Nothing could be more strictly defined than
the limits of his Office, and he cannot exceed
them without being guilty OF trcachery and
dishonor.
No judicial quality attaches TO the position.
There is no Office III our whole system Of gov
crnment which is so strictly trust, with abSo-
lutte and well-dciined limitations none that so
completely dcbars the exercise of individual
Judgment in the discharge OF its duties No
matter what may or may not be done III
other States, what injustice may seem likely
| think himself able to avert by acting indie
pendently-none of these things come within
the scope of his inquiry, none of them can
affect his action. He holds in his hand the
DdllOi IL HldJDilg VI MS '''p"-'i'iH'"' ''' W
delegated him to cast They have not COM
missioncd him to inquire to its effect or
Judge of It's consequences. They have simply
appointed hlm to cast it. He can do no other
thing-neither east another nor refuse to cast
that-without trcachcry to his trust and the
violation of the most solemn obligation that
can be laid uDon the citizen. THE TRIBUNE
has maintained from the beginning that the
| first necessity was an honest count, and that
no rule of retaliation nor casuistTy OF justify
| ing the means by the end would warrant any
crooked or unfair dealing. Two wrongs in
| that matter would not make right, and GER
tainly the suspicion that wrong has been done
in Louisiana or anywhere else would not
| excuse or palliate the great crime involved in
the proposition that some Republican elector
| should be guilty of treachcry to the voters
who trusted him, with the purpose Of correct
| ing injustice with which he has nothing to do.
There is a very general belief among our pco-
| pie that Providence may safely be trusted
with the welfare Of the nation. 1t is well
enough to remember this and that even in
| such q middle az the present Providence does
not need to he reinforced by fraud, falschood,
or treachcry to establish truth and justice.
! TIE PEOPLES WILL MUST BE OBEYED.
\Vn arc au,e ed to bnlpvn that a prceiIcuti,l