New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1876-12-26

any important aid to the claim of the Democrats,
that the House alone reject the vote Of State.
On the first question in dispute, as to the place
where the votes should be counted, il fully war
rants the Senate in insisting, if it thinks proper,
that the House of Representatives shall come to its
chamber. The count of the first five elections was
made in the Senate, and after the fourth election,
when the two houses failed to agree upon the place
and manner of opening the returns, the Senate in
formed the House that it was i" ready to meet them
in the Senate chamber" and the Representatives
marched over at the appointed hour. Since 1909
the ceremony has always taken place in the Repre-
sentatives hall, but this custom began at time
when the number Of members of Congress had in
creased so largely that the old Senate chamber be-
came too small to conveniently hold them.
The next and aI-impertant question, of who is
empowered to make the count, was not raised until
many years after the adoption of the Constitution.
When the returns which first made George Washing
ton President were opened the President of the
Senate counted the votes himself with the approba-
ton of everybody. The convention that framed the
Constitution in fact virtually instructed him to do
So for it passed just before it dissolved resolution
stating that the Senate should proceed to choose
President for the sole purpose of counting the cleo
toral votes. If anybody was competent at the time
to give true Interpretation of the Constitution 1t
would seem to be the men who had just finished the
work of creating the instrument.
At the second count the Vice-President presiding
over the Senate opened, read, and delivered to
telers the certificates, and the tellers examined
and ascertaned the votes" but then, as in all sub
sequent counts, the function of the tellers was
merely the clerical Of tabulating the votes and
adding them up. In short they were the clerks OF
the presiding officer. The two houses never as
serted any power over the count until 1921, when
rifrht of ri
to vote, and joint resolution adopted directing
the President of the Senate TO state the result as it
would stand with and without the vote of that State
which, il happened made no difference in the result.
Here it will be observed that Congress hesitated to
claim the right to reject the return of State even
although there was a doubt as to whether Missouri
was in the Union After the thirteenth Presl-
dental election, the question of rejecting the vote
of a disqualified elector in Ncw-Hampshire came up,
and although a Senate committee reported that
such question ought to be settled by permanent
provision on the subject, no action was taken by
either house and the vote was counted. In 1857
the Electoral College of Wisconsin met one day
later than the law required, and the vote was OBJ
jected to by Mr.. Orr, who maintained that the Con-
stituion conferred upon the two houses the power
TO determine the validity or invalidity of vote"
But Mr. Orr's resolution was LAID upon the table,
and the doctrine of its mover was thus refused in
dorsement There was no further questioning OF
returns until after the adoption of the Twcntysec-
ond Joint Rule, which in effect asserted very
broadly the power Of Congress TO reject votes at Its
pleasure and deputed the exercise OF that power To
either house acting separately. Under this rule
however, which had no warrant in the Constitution
or in precedent and which was war measure 10
prevent the States in rebellion from taking part III
the election of President, no votes were rejected
EXCEPT in cases where there were two conflicting
State Governments sending in rival sets
of returns. In 1869 the vote of Georgia was
objected to. The House resolved not to count It,
and the Senate to count ii. When the two houses
reassembed after voting on this question the Pres-
dent of the Senate ordered Georga's vote TO be
counted, and it done, amid great confusion
and an attempt on the part Of Gen. Butler to nave
the Senators driven out Of the ball as interlopers
The action of the President was based OH concur
rent resolution previously adopted, declaring that
Georgia should be counted if her vote made no
change in the result Objections were made III 1873
70 the votes of Mississippi and Texas on the ground
of informality and to that Of Georgia because cast
for a dead man, but they were both counted. AT
kansas and Louisiana were thrown out by the action
of the Senate on account of the dispute IN both
States between rival Governments.
At no time it will be observed, in the whole his
tory of Presidential elections was return rejected,
mr. even objected TO on the ground of fraud nj the
election or in the action of State returning boards
II is nm entirely new theory that Congress has the
right 10 90 behind the certified returns of State to
Iool, into the manner in which the election was
hold or the votes canvassed. The annals of Con-
0ress furnish no precedent whatever 20 base such
claim upon. L. g