The Findlay Jeffersonian. [volume] (Findlay, Hancock County, Ohio) 1870-1881, 1877-03-16
MR. coskI1ss said he had heard it

Mr. 4CoNKLING said he bad heard il
affirmed that the same reason which
entitled Mr.. Grover 10 be seated on q
prima facie case entitled Mr. kelloge
to be seated on a prima facie case yes
terday. If that position was sound in
law and sout d in truth, it proved con
clusively the caprice of those wbc
voted to refer his credentials yester
day. he denied that there was any
analogy; that there was any resem
blance between the two cases. The
Oregon case was one ia which there
was Legislature. an ascertained con
stitutional Legislature and necessarily
but one. 1t was case in which there
was an ascertained and acknowledged
Governor and only one constitutions
Governor, because the constitution
did not acknowledge dual Executive
in any State. The facts in the case o1
Grover made up prima facie case,
and the claimant was entitled to his
seat. Afterward any investigation
cculd be made as to the alleged vice
lying behind the certificate. The Sen-
ate knew, the world knew, that in
Louisiana two rival bodies hotly con
tested, restrained from violence and
tumult by the arm of power, had beer
asserting each against the other that it
was the lawful body, the lawful Legis
lature of the State. 1t was equally no.
torious that two Governors had been
sworn, and each was insisting that he
was the lawful Governor, and exerting
| the rrerogative and the attributes of
the Executive Of the State. The es-
sential question in regard to il was
whether ther7 was a legal Legislature
in Louisiana and whether there was a
lawful Governor, and that question t. e
Senate would be called upon to d. eide
whether a lawful Legislature existed
in the State or not.
Mr. Conhiing may be right in the po-
sition he has taken, but if he is we fear
the great body of the people who look
at The facts as they appear, are sadly
IN the wrong. 1t may be that Re-
turning Board created by State auth
ority and endowed not only with min
isterial but judicial powers, is perfect
ly competant 20 count the votes of
Slate, to take testimony and determine
the legality or illegality of returns, and
admit or reject the same, so far as
electors are concerned, and yet is in
competent to do the same thing in re
gard to the votes cast for members OF
the Legislature, though so authorized
by the act creating it, but we fail to
comprehend it so, and we believe the
great majority of the people of both
political organizations are equally un
able to compreheDd it in that light.
The same body then, which gave Ger
tificates of election to the Hayes elec-
tors gave certificates of election to
members of the Legislature who organ
lied under those certificates counted
the vote for Governor as required by
law, and declared Packard elected by
by over S, GOO majority. He was tur
nished certificate of election, inaug
ursted in due form, and when the
time came the Legislature elected Kel
logg q. S. Senator. No certificate of
election was given Nichols, and though
he was sworn IN as Governor and has
assumed to act as such, he is at best a
pretender with no authority to show
be had been chosen. Though there be
two persons claiming to be Governor,
but one held certificate of electionj
from the constituted authorities. |
there be two bodies claiming |
to be the Legislature, but one pUssess-
ed the requisite number of members
election There is therefore but one