The Rutland daily globe. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1873-1877, 1877-02-03

cult court, and was now pending, and he
asked whether the commission can take
jurisdiction from the supreme court Of
Florida after regular appeal was taken.
he urged that the power of the commissiC n
was limited to the power of congress In
considering questions affecting the vote
OF state, aud that act appoint
Ing the commission gave no power
to do more than 10 implied 10
the wotds "count the vote" The claim
made by the other side that the commits
sion had authority equal to that of court
and a writ Of quo warranto he submitted
was unfounded. 1t was organized to tide
over the difficulty and do the ministerial
act of counting the vote and could simply
determine from the face If tie certificate
whether or not Il was authentic. Ii wa
asked by the other side, should the certiG-
cate Of governor be taken against the
truth2 He asked were we TO TAX,
The cerifics of fifteen gentlemen
a. ainst the truthp Il was necessary
t. have some 6nal jurisdiction. Was it
here or in the state Legislature Klsso.
then went on to STATE that on the rec .nvass
ordered by the court Hayes electors wer,
returned elected, whereupon a third can.
viss was ordered and new board of can
vassers appointed. He spoke of the &C.
ton of the canvassing board in the first iu
stance and raid there was no proof any
where that their action was fraudulent.
In conclusion, Kasson said If you have
the right to say that another set of votes
must be couLted in Florida, you have the
right to tay that another set of votes must
be counted in New York. If you take
Jurisdiction to determine the mere ninety
votes which constitute one of the alleged
majorties, and TO upset the electoral col
lege that might exist there, you might 60
New York state and assert that the G0,0O0
majority there should he upset.
Mr.. Thurman asked if Kasson meant to
argue that if Florida had elected four cleo
tors who were laboring under disabilities
covered by the fourth amendment aud those
electors had cast their vote for president
the commission would he bound to count
such votes.
Mr.. Kasson-I suppose congress under
its power to give effect by legislation to
constitutional provisions might probably
provide by law for an investigation of the
question.
Mr.. McCrary followed, reviewing the
quo warranto case already referred to, and
reci!ing many authorities in connection
Herewith. The presiding justice inquired
whether the counsel proposed to offer evil
dence before preceding to argument. II
was replied, on behalf of O'Connor, that he
expected 10 offer evidence that lie sup.
posed evidence was already before the
commission without the necessity of further
offer.
Justice Miller suggested counsel might
make brief synopsis or statement of what
they proposed to offer instead of offering
it in detail.
The presiding justice asked Mr.. Eyarts
If he intended to offer any evidence
Mr.. Evaris said he had no evidence &c
offer unless there should be deteImlna
ton to admit evidence against his side
VIII oh he should then neei to meet.
Presiding justice-If the commission de
cides to receive evidence you would require
to meet that evidence.
Mr.. Evarts-Yes sir, especially relating
| to this particular matter of Humphreys
and whenever it is intended to show tina
Humphreys held office, we shall, perhapF
desire t, give evidence that he did not hole
that Office at the time referred to.
Thurman suggested there must he ,
great many facts as to which the counse
upon both sides could agree, not as Il
whether proof of them is admissabl,
in this proceeding but as TO tb'
existence of the facts. II couuse
would agree as far as they could il
respect to facts of which there would b.
10 possible doubt, leaving the question @
their admisssbility as a matter of law to tn
IL cision OF the tribunal, il would tend II
save lime. Adj urntd ill 1920 tomorrow