Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1876-12-20
The Law Of Electors.

Every intelligent citizen ought by this
time to be familiar with the fact that the
several states are at liberty, under the con
stitution, to devise their own plans for can
wasting the popular vote for President and
Vice President Nothing could be palmer
than the express declaration that each state
shall appoint its Presidential electors ain
such manner as the legislature thereof may
direct" The whole regulation of the matter
is left to the states. Each state adopts its
own plan, and the method in each may differ
from that in all the rest. They operate,
however, by virtue of an authority derived
from the states whose jurisdiction will re-
main absolute in the premises until some
change in the federal constitution shall pre-
scribe otherwise. The electors may be
chosen by general ticket. as in this state
they may be chosen by districts they may
be elected by popular vote; they may be
elected by the legisature-just as it shall
prescribe. As matter of fact, before the
war the electors of South Carolina were
always named by the legislature. 1t was so
for time in New York. and either state can
return to that mode if i, please, or modify
the plan in any other way.
The state of Louisiana, pursuant to the
power thus derived, has lawfully established
its system. 1t has provided that Presiden-
tal electors shall be chosen by popular vote,
on general ticket--the same as in Yer
mont that the statement of the result in
all parishes and polls shall go to returning
board that the board shall review and com
pile them; that said board shall throw out
the returns where the evidence shows there
was not fair and free election and that
the board shall determine and declare what
candidates are elected. In word, it has
provided that, so far as that state is con
cerned, the returning board shall be the
final and conclusive authority which in all
cases must exist somewhere. In Vermont
the several county clerks are made the can
wasting board, and their declaration is de
responding board is equally decisive. There
is this difference between the two cases
that in Vermont the board is not vested
with judicial powers in reviewing the re-
turns, while in Louisiana it is. The law
there, growing out of peculiar circumstances
and necessities, was passed years ago, aud
both parties have acquiesced in and acted
under it. In this state it would be compe-
tent for the Legislature to invest our canvass
ing board with similar functions. 1t being
all matter of state regulation, the law of
Louisiana is just as decisive for that state
as is ours for Vermont
If, then, the Louisiana board in its exer.
else of judicial functions, did not transcend
the powers conferred 10y the laws of the
state on what ground may its action be
impugned And on what pretext shall the
interference of Congress be sought If
Congress has the right to go behind and re-
view the declaration of Vermont, then ii
has the same right to go behind the declara
ton of Louisiana. The right is precisely
the same in both cases.
These facts ought to be kept constantly
in mind in all discussions concerning the
official declaration OF the vote in Louisiana