The Morning herald., 1877-01-26
TnE ELECTO9AL BILL.
Senator. B.ysvl speech IN. ~
UDtsed STATES senate.

Senator. Bayavl SPEECH In The
a UDtsed Atatos oenate.
In the United States Senate Mr..
Bayard said he might, perhaps, be
- . friend Of this mea-
sure, to allow It to 60 before the Senate and
country unaccompanied by any remarks Of
bis had 1t not been the pleasure Of the Sem
ase to assign him, ~. ono Of the minority in
this chsmber, to place upon the select
committee to frame bill To meet exigencies
Of the hour. Each party claimed success
for it, candidate, and insisted that he should
be declared President by the two Houses Of
Congress. The canvass was bitter; but the
time for judgment had almost come. It
could not be disguised that It had been
sought to raise an issue between the settle
ment Of this great question BY sheer force
aud arbitrary power, and by the peaceful
way oflaw and reason. This was . govern
ment Of law, and not Of force, and it must
not pass away. BY the measnre now before
the Senate 1t Was proposed to have .. peace
'ul settlement Of this difficulty. This bill
wss meant to lift the great question Of de-
termin,ng who has been elected President
aud Vice President Of the United States out
Of broils and tumults, and leave 1t In the
higher atmosphere Of judicial decision. He
argued that Congress had the power TO
regulate by law the count Of the electoral
vote. This new-fangled idea that the Pres.
ldent Of the Senate had tho right to
count the electoral vote had only
lately been discovered. Mr.. Bsyard
then quoted at length from the proceedings
Of tho Constitutional Convention to show
The intention of the trainers Of our Consti-
u.ion, and denied that the President Of the
Senate had the power to count the electoral
vote. If the trainers of the Constitution "
intended, how easy It would have been fol
them to have said 20. Such doctrine wat
contrary to the whole ususge Of the Govern
ment. The President Of the Senate did moi
summon the two Houses Of Congress II
witness bis act of counting the vote, bu
they summoned him to open the certificates
in their presence. He then referred to th,
features Of the pending bill, and said h.
Was sorry to bear the Senator from Ohit
nr. Snsrm4u) speak a. he did tn regard t.
selecting the dtth Judge by chance. sucl
remark was unjust to the Senator Wit
made 1t, and unjust to the tribunal upo,
which It reflected.
Mr.. Sherman said II Mr.. Bayard woult
Tell him that the dfth Judge was not to b
selected BY chance, he would take his wor'
and withdraw any remarks he had made II
regard thereto. ~
!: Mr.. Bayard said that the language Of th
bill did not warrant the Senator Mr.. Sher
many iu saying the hfth Judge was to b
selected by chance that he WAS to b
selected BY gambling operation on th
part of the four Judges designated.
4: Mr.. Bsysrd then referred TO the twenty
second joint rule, and said that under It, b.
willie caprice, any State could be disfran
chised of its electoral vote. The bill nov
before the Senate WAS not the product o
!; any one mans mind, but Was the subject 0
frequent amendment. His individua
opinions might lead him to object to th
employment Of the judicial branch ct al II
} -ngrsfting to any extent judicial powers o.
j. the political branch of the Government, D
: contldipg to 1t any question quasi political
: but his sense of the general value Of tn
measure and the necessity of such plsl
: led him to its support. He showed tha
Judge Nelson of the Supreme Court VA
uomipated and confirmed as one Of th'
High john Commission that Chief Justic'
Jay was sent a. Minister to England to ne
.ottate the treaty which bears his name
that Chief Justice Ellsworth was sent q
Minister to Spain, and that BY law th'
Chief Justice Of the United States IL Pres
ident of the Board Of Regents Of the Smith
sonian institute. 1t wa~ proper, safe and
constitutional to create the duty, and to a.
low the power 10 assume 1t and they wert
dealing With men whose service was N
high that there could be no doubt for . mo-
ment that they would decline 1t. This bill
was not, a. the Senator from Indiana (Mr.
Morton) had argued, compromise. II
only provided for sn honest adjudication
of the rights Of al. It was no compro-
mise in favor OF truth and right In tie
abstract and in the concrete. But suppose
1t was compr6nise. What was there in
. compromise that was disgrsceful either
TO men or nations. The very charter Of the
Government under which We live Was Gre
.ted 10 the spirit Of compromise and mutual
concession. Without this spirit, the Con-
s,tlution would not have been made, and
without Ito continuance could not be main.