Middletown transcript., 1876-12-09
leading members Of the Senate and
House Of Representatives.

III cOuutIy WuoTS suot0 10 ~ sn"o"
legislation, but 80 it is; and the very
fact that such condition exists shows
the strength Of the faith Of our people
in their own inherent justice and in the
capability of their institutions and rep
resentatives to find the way out Of
every danger. 1t is even more wonder
full that the law should have been per-
mitted to remain in its present condi7
tion by Congress. considering the num-
Der of warnings of danger they have
had from time to time in the last sixty
years As far back as 1917 an Elsc-
toral vote came from Indiana at time
when it was questioned whether In
diana was actually a State or only
Territory. There was talk about the
matter, but as the vote could not affect
the result, nothing came Of it. Again.
in 1921, when Missouri was passing
through her transition from Territorial
existence into Statehood, an Electoral
vote came from her, which caused in
quiry as to the right of Missouri to vote
for President. but no action, as the vote
made no difference one way or the
other. Then in 1857, an Electoral
certificate came from Wisconsin which
turned out to have been cast on day
not authorized by law. It was clearly
unlawful, but it was ruled by the then
President of the Senate, that it was not
in order for the two Houses to contend
about its regularity. and it was counted.
1t had no influence on the result, but if
that certificate had contained the deci-
sive vote, there would have been seri-
Gus time. for that was in the Fremont
and Buchanan contest. Again, although
there was an angry wrangle in each
House after the vote was declared. this
warning also passed without bringing
about the indispensable legislation to
guard against the danger 9 /
In 1865, however, came the Twenty
second Joint Rule. This was designed |
to guard against the counting of Elec-
toral votes from the Southern States
until after "recOnstruction" and re- e-ad-
mission into the Union. Under this
Rule there was dispute about the vote |
Of Georgia in 1869, and about the votes
Of Arkansas and Louisiana in 1873, all |
Of them being ruled out. None Of
these, however, influenced the result in |
any way. But the ruling out Of the
vote of Arkansas, the Senate voting to |
exclude it, and the House voting to ad-
nit it, turned out eventually to have
been based upon an inexcusable blum
der-so admitted by every one. This
set Congressmen to thinking Of the
dangerous condition of the law on the
subject; and it is to the credit Of Sen
stor Morton that he went to work sed- /
ulously and persistently to furnish
remedy by statute law. He even an
ticipated the difficulty Of 1873, for his
first effort was in January Of that year,
before the Electoral vote Of 1872 was
counted. He introduced bill upon the
subject, the object Of which was to reg
ulate the counting Of the vote under
sanction Of an act Of Congress. That
bill was subsequently passed by the
Senate, but failed to pass the House.
He introduced it again this very year.
when, after being passed by the Senate.
its further progress was checked by
motion to reconsider, which was never
acted upon. But in advocating that
bill, which was fair one, but by no
means perfect, be spoke with almost the
provision of a prophet Of the necessity
Of guarding against precisely the dan
gers which are threatening the country
to-day. 1t is lanlentable misfortune
that his bill was not perfected and
passed. There is time enough yet to
correct this omission. for Congress
meets on Monday next, and the Elec-
:oral votes are not to be counted by
Congress until the second Wednesday
n February. According to the rules.
t takes its place as unfinished business
IN the seventh day after the opening of
he session. There should be patriotism
enough in Congress to perfect and pass
t, with the least delay consistent with
deliberate consideration --P Philadelphia
Ledger, Nou. 29th.
SOUTH CAROLINA JuDaEs.-Judge
Wright. the colored judge Of the Su-