Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1876-11-10
A Political CRISIS Approachi-x.

STAR to the vital Importance OF providing
some more definite method OF counting the
electoral vote for President aud Vice Presi-
dent. The time has at last come, as We pre-
die ted II would, when both houses Of Con-
gress must see the imperative necessity of
adopting some system by which fair and
satisfactory count of the vote can be made
by both houses. The Senate last session In
formed the House that the joint rules of
the two houses were no longer In force
The twenty second joint rule, In brief,
provided that, II the two houses disagreed
on counting the vote of any state, IL
should be thrown out. Under this rule the
process might be kept up until no candidate
had majority of all the electoral votes, In
which case the election would go into the
House of representatives. 1t has recently
been intimated that the House will DOW con.
tend, should Hayes be elected, that the Joint
uIes are still in force. This must be mis-.
take, for joint rules cannot be such unless
agreed TO by both houses. This view il sus-
tanned by the veteran ex journal clerk of the
House, John NJ. Barclay, the author of
Barclays Digest" whose opinion on all
such subjects Is regarded as ipfallible by
parlismentarisns In both bodies. Under the
head OF "Joint Rules" the next edition of
she Digest will contain the following:
whenever the two Houses may fail to
adopt for the Congress the joint rules OF q
preceding Congress, (which frequently oc-
curs,) IL would seem, under the authority
conferred by the Constitution upon eacn
House, Art 1, section s. ito determ Inc the
rules CT Its proceedings to be the updoubted
right of each House, a pleas ure, to decline
further acquiescence In the enforcement of
any one or all OF them. And hence, although
the JOINT rules g. acquiesced Ia during the
ForIy-third Congress, appear Ia this 'Di-
gest,' the following proceedings during the
nrst session of the present Congress would
in force"
Here follow the proceedings of the Senate
and House on the subject of Joint rules Ali
ofwhlch have been recently published
IL Is then probably safe TO assume that
rone Of the joint rules are In force, and 1t
therefore follows that either . new rule for
counting the vote must be adopted or the
Constitution alone must be the ouly guide
In The latter event the question will arise
shall the plain letter OF the Cons titution be
followed, or Will precedent govern? The
New \ ork Tribune thin ks that certain prece-
dents liked by usage may go far towards pre-
venting AWKWARD and even dangerous COM
pifcaiiOrs. The records show (D that the
President of the Senate has never ATTEMPTED
to act as a Judicial officer In determining the
validity OF state vo Q, (2l That while such
questions have Invariably been referred to
the two houses of Congress, neither houss
state or choose between two sets of returns
except under the twenty second rule, which
Congress has expressly omitted to re adopt;
(S) that all disputes OF this nature that have
arisen have been decided by the two houses,
acting concurrenily, though they derived no
authority To do SO, either from the constitu-
ton or the laws.
On the other hand, let Il be supposed for q
moment that the presiding officer OF the
Senate should entertain the view that he
alone, uBder the Constitution, 10 vested with
The sole power OF opening and counting the
vote, and should decline 10 entertain objec-
lions In regard TO counting the vote of any
particular state, pointing TO that clause OF
the Constitution which says that after the
votes are opened they shau then be counted
The Constitution does not apparently con-
template the exigency of an objection to
counting the vote OF any state, but simply
says the vote shall then be counted" II Is
more reasonable TO suppose, however, In
the absence Of the 22d joint rule, that
all questions of this kind arising would
De referred 10 the two houses for concur
rent action, and that should q majority OF
OF both houses vote against throwing out
tne vote OF sDy state, IL would not be
counted by tie presiding officer. But this
system would be quite as vicious as that
provided by the defupct 22d joint rule since
objections might be carried so tar as TO throw
the election into the House. In the event of
such rule of action the counting OF the
vote will be attended with imminent dan
ger TO the country. The hope Of the New
York Tribune and of.all good citizens is, that
Congress, dGriIg the coming session, aud
before The counting OF the cleo oral votes
may come to some wise and patriotic agree
ment whereby, while all just rights will be
preserved, the danger OF go depIorable con-
troversy will be averted.