New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1877-01-09
BOW ARE THE ELECTORAL VOTES TO BE
COTkTEDf

Everything we hear from Washington in
dicates purpose on the part of Congress to
"cOuntn the electoral votes, asserting therein
its right to exercise judgment as to what
certificates" of votes are "yOtes" In the con-
stitutonal sense. But the great question
which cOnfronts the committee is, How is this
power to be exercisedf There are three con-
fiictins views:
L. There are those who claim this right
as residing in the joint convention, voting per
capita. This theory, however, destroys the
representative character of the joint cOnven-
ton, and resolves it into a mass meeting i'll
which, of course, the voice of the smaller OF
the two bodies would not be heard or needed.
Allusage refers to each house, acting separately,
every question arising in joint convention;
and there is no respectable constitutional
authority for the opposite claim.
III. Others insist that each house has power,
by negative action, to reject any certificate.
This is the theory of the defunct Odd Joint
Rule, under which such fantastic tricks were
played in 1878 ; and proceeds upon the notion
not only that each branch of the joint cOnvcn-
ton has a negative upon the other, but that
the vote of an Electoral College, however per-
law, has no rghtfu vigor of its own. For
the claim assumes the right to reject
at will, any return. This doctrine is
unsOund in that it involves an assertion
of an ungrantcd and enormous power in each
of the two houses-and a power which the
House of Representatives may, at any time,
assert in order to defeat declaration of cleo
ton, and thereby throw the choice Of Presi-
dent into its own hands. 1t is simply incredi-
| Bile to suppose that such power is lodged in
any Of the phrases of the Constitution, or any
fair inference from any of them, or any of
the presidents under them. For so enormous
| a power, it is not unreasonable that we de-
mand the line and text. When it is remcm-
| bered that every member of the House is more
or less partisan, and has direct personal
| interest in the issue of Presidential struggle
by the power and patronage it will give or
take from him, it is impossible that the men
| who framed our Constitution intended to give
the House a power, tho glittering prizes of
| which would be perpetual bride to them for
its INSCRIPTIONS exercise. Nothing so cacu-
lated to "Mexicanize" our politics has ever
been suggested (; and the tendency of opinion
is all against it.
action of the two houses may throw out or re-
ceive an electoral vote. This is tho most IA
| tional of the three views. For, in law, some
| thing is to be conceded to regular, formal
perfect certificate of proper officers of tho
| States, made out in accordance with State and
| United States statutes. Such q paper consti-
tutcs of itself, prima tacie, a certificate; and
all analogies and all sound principle requIge
that it be received; or, if rejected, that it be
rejected not by the vote of fitful majority of
one house. but by the concurrent vote of the
two. The uninterrupted doctrine and prac-
tice of the House of Representatives, in its own
affairs has for seventy years been that such u
paper is valid and binding. Why should the
! two houses not be bound by the same doctrine
1t is certainly more accordant with our usages
to hold that such paper is not to be set aside
under any less authority than the concurrence
| of q majority of each of the two bodies,
in whose presence the certificates are to be
| opened.
| To which view will the Joint Committee in
clincf The mass meeting votef The separate
action, each having q negative The concur
rent action, with negative vote of each ncccs-
sary to rejectf IL the first. the country at
once confronts tho dangers of the one-chambcr
representative systcm-which our fathers
thought they had explicitly excluded from our