New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1877-02-21
THE E1ECTORAL TRIBUNAL.
The I.ouislana Case.

OOl6DtlOu buhb INC bcELlhOdvO VI
Kellogg was imperative. 1t wOuld be re-
membered that when the vote of Connec-
ticut was counted, her Governor, mr. In
gersoll, was a presidential electOr at large,
and that his certificate had been received
without objection. Such objections were
hardly suitable to the dignity of the coca
sien. 1t had also been objected to-day,
and the objection had been urged with a
good deal of zeal, that Governor Kellogg
was not the Governor of Louisiana, and
that Louisiana was governed by military
despOtism He supposed that that meant
that military force had been, on applica-
ton of Governor Kellogg to the President,
ordered to Louisiana for the purpose of sup
pressing insurrectiOn. The learned counsel
Mr.. Carpenterl was right, be supposed, in
saying that without such aid the govern
ment of which Mr.. Kellogg was the head
would have been overturned. But counsel
should have reflected that the very fact
that Governor Kellogg had made such an
application, and that it had been granted,
was decisive evidence that be was the Gov
ernOr of Louisiana. What was the offer
here on the other side4 1t was that the
commission should, by a search and scru.
tiny of many, if not all, the polls in Louis
lana, ascertain what had been the vote of
Louisiana at the last election. 1t was pro.
posed that the commission should override
and disregard and go behind the action of
the final Returning Board of that State and
hold it for naught. He said he would salts
fy the commission beyond all question that
the Returning Board, as constituted, had the
power delegated to it by the statutes of
Louisiana to determine the number of votes
cast for electors, and power to certify it
| finally, so far az the authority of that State
was concerned, and he would also satisfy
| the commission that the objection that q
vacancy in the Electoral College could not
be filled by the college itself, had no fOun.
| dalton whatever. 1t seemed to him that
that the decision of the commission in the
| Florida case determined the entire question
here raised as to the right of the commits
| sion to go behind the action of the Return
| ing Board and he could not perceive that
any question-much less the main ques-
| tion-was now open to argument. He
| quoted against Mr.. Trumbulrs argument
| to-day from q report made by Senator
| Trumbull to the effect that neither the
Senate nor the House, nor both houses
| Jointly, have power under the constitution
TO canvass the returns of an election, and
that the mode and manner of choosing
electors was left exclusively to the States.
| He also quoted on the same point a letter
recently published from ex-Judge Church,
| of New York, whom he characterized as a
| great lawyer, an upright judge and even a
| pure politician. He went on to argue that
| the State oorrects the frauds of its own
officers and does not apply to Congress for
the purpose, and that Congress would best
perform it's duty by disoharging it within
its authority, leaving these occasional
frauds that are sometimes assumed, and
sometimes offered to be proved, to be taken
care of by the tribunals having Jurisdiction
over them. Congress might have the power
| but it did not have the right to disreg ard
the highest legal authority of State. The
| offer made on the other side would lead to
proceedings endless in detail, harrassing in
their very nature, increasing tenfOld the
public excitement which was already seer
gathering about the tribunal. Here were
Offers of evidence, infamed to the last de
gree by their mode of statement, involving
inquiries of the most extraordinary and
painful character, leading to answers, lead
ing to testimony in reply-teetimOny in jus
LITIGATION of the Returning Board thai
would be endless and difficult of pro
curement Ard all for whatl To en-
able this tribunal to violate the gu
premacy of the State He had heard
more than one threat eouched under shields
of language and so framed that they nigh
not quite reach in plain terms their mark
but he understood them, land they we're I'm
worthy of the circumstances under which
the tribunal was formed, and quite I'M
worthy of those who sought its iurisdic
ton. He proceeded to discuss the laws o.
Louisiana as to the power to I'LL vacancies
in the Electoral College, and in reply TO
question by Mr.. HuntOn, whether the ac
of 1872 did not repeal the act of 1868 il
that regard, he said that it did not tOuol
it at all, and that it was an absurdity Il
hold that an express purpose of the copsti
tuition which had been carried out by Fed
eral legislation, supplemented by Stat
legislation, could be defeated by giving vic
lent construction TO a clause which hat
abundance of other matter to feed upOl
without being applied to the case of presi
dental electors.
Commissioner Hoar suggested TO MI
StOughtOn that it was hardly worth Will
for him to spend time in the endeavor {
satisfy the commission on that point.
Mr.. StOughtou acted on the suggestion
and passed to other points. Coming in tn
eourse of his argument to the ObjectiO
made to the Returning Board of Louisian
for not having filled the vacancy in tn
board, he said that the law on the subjeC
was merely directory, and that failure t
: | obey the law did not interfere in any mar
! ner with the capacity or jurisdiction of Oh
board. If two of the five members ha
been Democrats and had afterward change
their politios, would the board, he asked
cease to exist on that ACCOUNT He state
the problem which had presented itself
be solved in Louisiana by the Democrat
party as being that in forty parishes, abou
which there was 40 dispute, there was
u
q that in the remaining seventeen parisht
, there were 20, 1913 colored voters registere
4 and 1928 white voters. How was thE
problem to be sOlvedl The records Of thel
4 parishes showed that the problem had bee
: sought to be solved by bloody hands.
conclusion he said: "Talk to me about on
: RACES, frauds and the Acknowledgement
voters. There are two sides to the que
1 ton, and if you sit here to go back and cal
! vass the votes, you sit here to administ'
4 the laws of Louisiana, and you must q
l. minister them by learning who have bee
4 disfranehised, and what was the lawful vo
! of that State in harmony with her law
n and not in harmony with the will OF
It party"
o Mr.. Shellabarger, of counsel for the K
y publican side, next addressed the cOmml
# sion. He said the first question was VIII
Q are the statutes enacted by Louisiana
reetinR the appointment of electors, al
n what statutes were in force last year co
i ering that matter2 The commission, aft
II careful examination, would be unanimO
a in the opinion that the act Of 1872 did 90
a ern in 1876 during the presidential electio
and that the revisory act OF 1870, viii.
l. provided for a canvass of the returns
|, the board and Governor, was repealed, al
Q was not ia force in 1876 For that pr
i. vision which made the Governor the ca
a yasser for the purposes of the election vi
r inconsistent with the tifty-fOurth section
n the session act of 1870, which EXPRESS
provided a different tribunal for al q
10 elections, including the Electoral Colleg
z I5 was alsO repealed by the repealil
= clause of the session act OF lS y. ms Q
= of 1879 purports to supply the machine
q for every public election in the State by
general terms and proYisi0ns-its se0I
1 But. more conclusive than all is this IA
y In section two it is expressly declared tn