Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1877-02-03
THE COMMISSION.
The Florida Case Opened by
David Dudley Field.
Able Counsel Present for Both Parties

WAsHNGToN, February . The electoral CON
mission met at one o'clock.
Inc presiding justice said the question was ask
ed yesterday, wv hat is the case 7" to which be
had replied that it consists of three certificate,
with accompanying papers and objections
lie would now stale that two directors on eacl
SIDE would be allowed TO speak. On opening the
case, those representing objection number one
which was presented by Field, would speak first
and under the fourth Iule, they would be allowed
two hours in which to state the case and argue il
support of their objection.
Field asked whether afr lie ..oi, had
spoken and the opening aIgum.n, --ade, any re-
ply would be allowed.
Justice Clifford said the rules made no provision
for any reply.
Field then opened tie Argument as an ohiecto,
IN the case Of Florida, and argued in favor of go
ing behind the face of the returns. He was fol
lowed by Representative Tucker OF Virginia on
tue same side of the case.
Among the counsel present are Evarts Slough.
ton and Shelaberger for the republicans, Trum
bull and Carpenter for the democrats. Charlie,
Conor was also present, as well as Senator SaI.
gent and William f. Caander
Mr.. Field reviewed the action of the retulning
board and OF Gov. Stearns and read from the cyi.
dence taken before the House committee to show
that the votes of different precincts had been
thrown out without particle of evidence, and
upon the mere suggestion of belief that intimida-
ton bad been practiced. The votes of townsville
and Deibyylile were cited instances of this &C.
tlon lie argued that the paramount question be.
lore the commission was whether in the face oil
such testimony as this, it can be ella lined that the
face OF the returns is to be considered as conclu
sve and binding
The usual form Of stating the question, "Cau
you go behind the certificate Z" is an erroneous
form. The question should be revised so as to
read, Can the certificates 90 behind the truth and
conceal i"
There is no pretence that the vote of the state
was not given for Tilden and Hendricks, the sole
pretext for denying the fact being certificate OF
Gov. Stearns. They say that truth cannot he
proposition that two houses Of Congress have no
right, either separately or together 10 consider OF
inquire into any act which Gov. Stearns may GER
tfy to congress.
suppose that the honored government of Mass
achusetts should become so debased and fallen as
to certify that in the recent election the Tllden
and hendricks electors had received a majority
OF the votes OF the people Of Massachusetts, does
any man mean to &c II me that you cannot prove
that certificate to be false. Where is the law to
support such statement. Nay, more, if an act
OF congress had declared that that certificate
should be conclusive, that act would be unconsti-
tulonai. 1t declares or asserts that the person
having the highest number of votes shall be presi-
dent, not the person declared to have the highest
number of votes.
and take from the person actually having the
highest number of votes, such rights as he IS en-
utleu 10 oy these votes, and il you BY an act
OF congress to declare in the most positive terms
that the certificates of the government should be
conclusive against all proof, you would transient
the limits of the organic law
Inc constitution nowhere declared that the Ger.
tncate OF governor shall be conclusive against
all proof in regard 10 the election of President.
The constitution distinctly declared that it is the
person having the highest number of votes who
shall be declared elected, and it cannot be right.
iny said that the certificate of the governor of a
state can override this provision of the constitu.
ton.
MIR. Field cited the case of Barstow of Wscon.
sin 9th Wisconsin Reports) to show the proprety
OF proceeding by quo wsrranto. la that case the
usurpIng governor was ousted by the courts, and
the rlghtful governor installed in his stead which
is parallel case to that of Florida.
MIR. Field regretted that there was no similar
provision of law bearing on the ques ton OF presi-
dency, and paid high tribute to the foresight and
states manship of one menber of the commission
Senator Molton) for having discovered the latest
difficulty IN the question OF disputed presidency,
and labored early for its settlement.