The daily gazette., 1876-11-16

|
been candid enough to recognize the un-
doubted authority of Congress and its re-
spective branches.-N. Y. San.
THE CLEAR ABILiTY AND REsO-
FEAT THE CONSPIRACY TO
STEAL THE PRESIDENCY.
From the brooklyn Eagle.
In case the pending conspiracy should
get to the House of Representatives, the
situation will be just this: The Senate
holds that the twenty-second joint rule,
Glowing either House to object to the
counting of the vote of any State is dead.
'"he House holds that it is not. The claim
of the Senate is based on the fact that
last winter when it considered the joint
rules, it declined to concur in the twenty
second, the one under dispute. The claim
of the House is based on the fact that
when it considered the joint rules, t de-
clined to concur in the Senate's effort to
ripeal the twenty-second rule. The SEN
ate insists that all joint rules die with the
Congress and must be revived, If at all, by
both Houses of the next Congress. The
Houses theory is that the House of Rep
resentatives is a new body every two
years, but that the Senate is perpetual
body, two-thirds of whose members hold
over every time any House expires by lin
itation and is renewed by the popular
vote. The Senate's constant practice hith-
erto, and the practice of all the Republi-
can Houses since 1860, have been identi-
cal with the claim of the present House,
about the perpetuity of the Senate and
the continuous force of all joint rules up
on each successive House, until the SEN
ate and House jointly modify them. The
twenty-second joint rule went into force
when the electoral votes of Grant and
Colfax and Seymour and Blair,were count
ed in February, 1865.
Mr.. S. j. Randall, who has been in
Congress for nearly twenty years, and
who is an excellent Parliamentarian, says
that joint rule has never been repealed in
both Houses. The records bear him out
in this. Mr.. Randall also says that when
the same rule governed in the counting
the votes for Grant and Wilson and Gree
| ley and Brown in 1872, it was inherited
over from 1868, and had not been formal
| ly readopted for the purpose Of 1872. lie
insists in the same line of view that as no
House since 1872 has concurred in the
Senate's vote to repeal it, it holds over in
| 1876 from 1872, the same as in 1872, it
held over from 1868. The records of the
House show that Mr.. Randall's statements
are correct, according to the declaration
of Mr.. John NJ. Barclay, who was journal
clerk from 1S4S to 1875, and who is Re-
publican.
The Committee on the part of the
House, appointed by Speaker Blaine in
| 1872 to act with Senate Committee to
arrange for the counting Of the Electoral
votes, treated the twenty second joint rule
as in force, holding over from 1868, and
neither the Senate nor the House formal
ly readopted it, though both took official
notice of the fact that it survived and gov
erned in its binding effect. Such is the
purport of the statement which Major
Mcdonald, Chief Clerk of the Senate for
/ forty years, and one Of the best Parli-
amentary authorities in any land, d,contrib-
utes to the Herldd. There is no doubt
that the practice and views of the Senate
and the House heretofore have been in
line with the views of Mr.. Randall now
and opposed to the present theory of the
matter propounded on the part of Repub
lican Senators. The Senate insisted that
the rule preserved its virtue and opera
ton so long as the Housewas Republican
without any readoption. When the
House became Democratic, the Senate
insisted that the rule had died, and retus
, ed to revive it. The House said: SIT
, took both the Senate and the House to
, adopt the rule. 1t takes both to undo it.
We decline to undo it. Itstands."
1t cannot be denied that the Senate has
proclaimed theory to meet an occasion,
and that the House adheres to the prac-
tice laid down by the Republican Con-
: crosses themselves, because the change in
the political situation causes that practice
; to favor the party against which it was
first devised. We have our own views
' of the constitutionality ofthe joint rule
i of itself and of the lawfulness Of any pro-
: ceedings under it in 1868 and 1872, but
o those views are not in order for Republi-
n cans to urge who devised the rule and in
= forced it. and the House Democrats will
e not be expected to be wiser than the Re-
: mblicans, when they can turn their own
= weapons upon them in this manner.
4 There can be no doubt that if the pend.
e ing programme of fraud for Hayes in
d Florida, South Carolina and Louisiana /.
If carried out, that when Chairman Ferry
D. of the Senate, reaches those States in the
:, count, the House will object to the frs
4 one of them which is reached, and tha
e if Mr.. Ferry refuses to entertain the OBJ
l. lection, the House will manifest its righ
'e to so object by retiring from the presence
a of the Senate, and by itself proceeding
II to take q vote upon the objection, as tn
u 22d rule provides. If the Senate refuse
~ ~ to 90 by itself under the rule and con
ct slider the objection, the absence of tn
e. House will destroy that condition of 81