The daily gazette., 1876-12-18

assumed the exercise of any such power.
Certainly, Mr.. President, no reasonable
man can complain of lack of distinctness
in the utterances of the President
up to this period in the proceedings of
the convention. will leave you sir land
the Senate to determine how far these ex
pressions of the President of the Senate
agree with the assertions of the Senator
from Vermont Mr.. EDMuNDs and the
Senator from Indiana, that che said the
only thing in order was to count the
vote"
You will bear in mind, also, Mr.. Presi
dent, that, according to the statement
of the Senator from Vermont, [Mr. Ed
MUNDs,l this is "the first instance when
any question was made"
Immediately following the emphatic
disclaimer of the presiding officer just
quoted Senator Cass of Michigan, whose
long public service and experience in
public affairs are familiar to lis all
said:
The only thing which remains for us to
do, If there are einsuperabled difficultiesi in the
spective halls. Then let the Senate or the
Houseof Representatives bring up the mat
ter for action.
The presiding officer having informed
the House that the tellers had not yet
completed their certificates, Senator
Douglas, of illinois, whose ability and ex-
perience We're scarcely second to those
of any public man in the country, said;
/ rise to state, that, in my opinion, the
tcllers have no right to authenticate that
certificate until the two houses have passed
upon it as to its being true count. | rise
to protest against this joint conven-
ton being dissolved until the question
which has been raised shall have been de-
clded.
l am passing on as rapidly as may
with partial history of the eventful
proceedings Of the convention and of the
Houses of Congress, for do not desire to
detain the Senate at this late hour.
Some question had arisen as to to the
| presentation of the certificate of the
tellers, and Mr.. Mason, the presiding Of
| ticer, said:
/ that the duty of the tellers has not yet been
| discharged. The telers, it would appear
made their report before they had signed
the certificate. The vote will be again read
to the two Houses. and they can ieterHiin,
rhdt shall be done.
l now quote Mr. Washburne, of Illinois
speaking little later in the debate:
| demand the reading of all the officia
papers connected With the Wisconsin cast
| / thing the convention have the right Il
know what those papers are.
The pRESIpING OFFICER The Chai
will direct them to be read.
Now Mr.. President, if you will refer t,
,, the proceedings in the Senate, whicl
took place Immediately after the Sena
. tors returned to the Senate Chamber
you will find the presiding officer, MI
Mason recorded as follows:
| The Chair will state to the Senate as tn
result of the action in the Hall of the HouS
of Representatives in counting the votes
that the duty was deyolved upon the prcSid
ing officer, there, by the concurrent order o
the two Houses.
| On page Gi5, the President of the Sen
jate again stated:
| The presiding officer desires to say. as h,
thought he had distinctly stated while pre-
siding over the two Houses in the Chamber
of the House of Representatives that the
conception of the Senator from Georgia il
III lilt vi tnt
presiding officer. The presiiing o6icer did no.
t,ticftdke 10 decide tchcther tie cote ofthe STATE
| Of Wisconsin UdS a good t0fe on q bdf rotc :
| The presiding officer upon that matter did
no more than recte the fact which was re-
ported to him by the tellers, pursuant to
the order concurrent of the two Houses.
The presiding officer did nomore than an
nounce that the vote of Wisconsin had been
| given to John G. Fremont. Whether il rds
a good rate OF q bal rote. he did not unie,take
to deciie The presiding officer announced
further that James Buchanan had a ma
jority of all the votes given, and that such
toral vote; and he declared as his duty re-
/ quired him to do, that James Buchanan
was thereby elected President of the United
| States.
Ifthe result could have been affected by
i the collateral fact reported by the tellers
/ that the vote of the State of Wisconsin had
been given on a day different from that
prescribed by law, the presiding officer
would have considered it is duty to have
reported as the state of the vote, that wheth-
er a majority OF the whole electoral votes
have been given to James Buchanan would
| depend ON canyaSSing the votes dtlttty that II,
/ did not assume. But inasmuch rs ii appear
ed clearly from the state of the vote that
| whether the vote of the State of Wisconsin
was counted or not the result of the election
remained unaffected. he announced as he
| considered his duty toannounce that James
| Buchanan had a majority of all the votes
| cast, and that such majority was ma ajority
/ oil the WnOie Vi NOlcS.
Now sir, mark the presiding officers
concluding sentence:
He disclaims having assumed on himself
any authority to determine whether that
| vote or any other r0te was a good or a bad
| vote.
| And finally, rs to the action of the
then President of the Senate, 1 read
from page $40 of the Congressional Globe
| now before me in these words:
| The presiding officer did no more than
| give the result as stated by the tellers and
| then in the further discharge of the duty
| devolved upon the presiding officer by the
| concurrent resolution he announced the
person who was elected the Constitution
providing that .the person having the great
| est number of votes for President shall be
| the President, If such number be a majority
| of the whole number of electors appointed y
| The presiding officer in his own Judgment
| believes now, that he declared correctly, as
| the state of the vote, that James Buchanan
had received the greatest number, and that
| that number was n majority of the whole
| number of electors not undertaking to de-
eide and not having decided.
call the attention of the Senators from