Staunton spectator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1849-1896, 1877-01-16
Senator Gardon's Views upon the Pres.
iaential Question.

DIFFERENT PHASES OF THE ELECTORAL
RATION OF Mr.. TILDEN-AN UN-
SwERyING ADHERENCE TO THE LAW
AND TIE pRECEDENTS ASKED FOR.
WASHINGTON. d. c., December q,
1S76-Hon. A. Fl. Colquitt, Governor
Elect, Atlanta Ga.-My Dear Governor !:
L do not wonder at your anxious inquiry
as to the prospects of Mr.. Tilden's inau-
guration. | believe him to have been
fairly, peacefully, constitutiohally elect
ed. Such Is tue conviction, think, of
the country--of all Democrats, and of a
large body of Republicans who support
ed Governor Hayes.
How any unpreiudiced man can doubt
it, or how his Inauguration can be de-
feated with any show of compliance
with law, seems to me beyond compre-
hension. andto plain people the assump-
tion of the office of Chief Executive
against the censtitutionally expressed
will of the people, would seem an act
of usurpation, and to mark another
stage in the history of an expiring Re-
public.
OF course it is idle, in advance of the
report of the joiat committee of the two
speculate as to the plan to be adopted for
counting the electoral votes, but it is safe
to say that no plan which finds support
in the letter or spirit of the Constitution,
in the declared opinion of it's trainers, or
in the practice or precedents of the Gov
ernment, or that will stand the test of
time, can be adopted to count in Govern
or Hayes. repeat that of all the plans
for counting in that gentleman which
the Republican press is suggesting, and
take different hues with each succeeding
day as party exigency or the public pulse
seems to demand, not one of them has
the least warrant of law or sanction of
commanding precedent. Upon any one
construction OF the Constitution, except
that which would confer uron the Vice
President all the powers which Congress
possesses to count or reject the vote of
States, land that is no construction at
all the result of the counting must be
the election of Mr.. Tilden.
If. for instance, the 23rinaa .fGcie pro-
gramme, which was the: Republican plan
until the action of Governor Grover, of
Oregon, is to be adopted, Mr.. Tilden has
lS5 votes and is elected. If, on the con-
trary, Congress is to go behind the GER
tificates and count the votes as given by
the people Of the States, Mr.. Tilden has
1875 without South Carolina, and of
course is elected.
If the etwenty-second joint rule is to be
readopted allowing either house to OBJ
ject to the counting of State, of course
the House OF Representatives will OBJ
iect to counting Louisiana, Florida, and
possibly South Carolina for Governor
Hayes. 1t cannot be supposed that the
Ii will RI h,u fhnco
States counted as manipulated by re-
turning boards, who have usurped pow
ers not conferred by the laws of those
States, and expressly denied by the
courts in two of them. The result on
that plan wouldSbe to leave Mr.. Hayes
with only 1856 votes, and, therefore, not
elected.
If the bill of Senator Morton, now
before the Senate on motion of Senator
Edmunds, should be passed, requiring
all votes to be counted from States which
have sent up but one set of certificates,
or the one counted upon which both
houses agree where there are two re-
turns, then would the result also be Mr..
Tilden's election.
Again, if that clause of the COnstitu-
ton which requires for the election of a
President majority of all the electors
appointed be construed to mean ma
jority Of electors legally chosen, and the
votes of one or more States should be
rejected, it would leave lS4 majority,
and Mr.. Tiden is elected. Or if the
other construction be given to that
clause-viz: that it requires l85 votes to
elect-that is, majority of all the cleo
tors appointed, whether counted Or not
then, although there would be no elec-
ton by the people in case any State were
rejected, yet the House would elect, and
would elect Mr.. Tilden.
But suppose the joint committee should
fail to- agree and the counting be left
where the Constitution leaves it. to the
two houses. In that case the vote OF no
State, to which objection was made, could
be lawfully counted +; because. as counting
is an affirmative act to be performed hy
both houses, it cannot be done by one.