Ottumwa weekly courier. (Ottumwa, Wapello County, Iowa) 1872-1899, 1876-12-20
Mr.. Bogy argued that tellers an

Mr.. Bogy argued that tellers an
pointed by the two Houses, and no
the President of the Senate, had al
ways counted the electoral votes
whether the JOINT rule was in fore,
or not, it was simply the 18th consti
tutional amendment. The two hous.
es had counted the electoral vote the
last six times on the same principle az
the ed joint rule. A. Joint commit.
tee OF both houses prepared that rule
anu both houses passed it unanimous.
~. In counting the votes the first
act was receiving them, and this re.
qulrcd the concurrence of both hous-
es.
Mr.. Edmunds said by this logic
every state might be objected to by
one house or the other, and possibly
the vote of Delaware or some small
state might remain to elect Presi.
dent. That would be the breaking
up of the Government by the consti.
tutional powers of Congress.
MIR. Bogy said the fundamental
principle Of government was that the
peoples representatives would faith.
fully discharge her duties. when
dishonesty entered Legislative bodies
and accomplished such a result a.
Mr.. Edmunds had suggested, the
government would become a farce.
and had better be turned into q iles
potism. When Congress should cease
to be influenced by high and patriot-
ic motives no joint rule would. protect
that body. Partyism was valuable.
but patriotism was essential. He had
faith in the Congress of the United
states. However weak and ignorant
some OF its members, it was the bet
ter tribunal for the electoral count
Would the Supreme Court be less
fallible? Were they less men and
liable to frailties III
Mr.. Burnside asked if Mr.. Bory
thought Congress could be actuated
by higher motives than the two Com
missions who witnessed the Louisiana
count? - -.
Mr., Bogy said all Commissioners
sent to Louisiana had agreed in rep
resenting that the government Of that
State was founded in fraud.
Mr.. Burnside asked if there was
any tribunal whose authority people
would rather trust than the Supreme
Court.
Mr.. Bogy argued against making
the Court of q political nature, and
said whatever its decision in the pres
cnt case, for instance, there would be
violent denunciations and loss of re-
spect for it. The electoral count was
the duty of the legislative, not the
judicial branch of the government.
Representatives of the people and of
the states were best adapted to per-
form this duty. Once when party
politics pressed the Court hard, it re-
jccted it, and doubtless would do SO
again. Tho day was not far distant
when members of Congress would
rise above party and feel that they
entrusted with the cause of liberty.
He felt that they would so discharge
their duties that the yawning gulf
now at their feet would be hridged
over and the country again enter up
on a career of peace and prosperity as
had made it great for q hundred
years.
Mr.. Randolph opposed transferring
the count to the Supreme Court, and
made quotations sho wing precedcnts
were for the count to be made by
Congress, and not by the President Of
the Senate.
A vote was taken on the passage Of
a joint resolution proposing consti-
tutional amendment, and it was re-
jected by a vote of IA yeas to 81 nays,
as follows:
Ycas-Allison, Anthony, Blaine,
Burnside, Conkling, Edmunds, Ferry,
Frclinghuyscn, Hamlin, Hitchcock,
Key. Morton, West and Wright-l4.
Nays-Alcorn, Bayard, Bogy, Booth,
Bruce, Cameron, of Penn, Clayton.
Chaffee, Conover, Dawes, Dennis,
Eaton, Goldthwaite, Hamilton, Har-
vey, Ingalls,, Jones Of Fla, Herman,
Logan, McCreary, Macy, Morton,
Norwood, Patterson, Price, Randolph
Thurman. Wallace, Withers and
Whyte-30:
Mcssrs. Window and Christiancy,
who would have voted in the affirm
ative, were paired with Messrs. RAN
som and Davis, who would have
voted in the negative.
Mr.. Edmunds gave notice that to-
morrow he would move to take up
the bill to provide for regular
counting of the votes for President
and vice President and decision of
the questions arising thereon, which
passed the Senate at The last session,
but now it was before that body on
motion TO reconsider. Answering
sherman he said the Oregon resolu-
tion had been postponed until to-
morrow, but the case was practically
covered by his resolution, which the
Senate had passed early in the ses-
sion, authorizing investigations into
certain State elections, and also into
the eligibility of electors.
HOUSE.
Knott, chairman of the Judiciary
committee, reported substitute for
McCrary's resolution for counting the
electoral vote and providing for
committee ofscven to act in conjnnc-
tion with similar Senate committee
and report forthwith measure
deemed best for the accomplishment
of the desired end also another com.
mittee of seven to report what are the
powers, privileges and duties of the
House in the Electoral Count.
The resolution was adopted with
ont debate or division under the op-
Grafton of the previous question.
The Senate amendments to last ses-
sion's postal bill, for the re-establish-
ment of the fast mail and the frank.
ing privilege, were rejected as being
foreign to this bill. Soon afterward
the House went into committee ofthe
whole on the postoflice appropriation