Perrysburg journal. (Perrysburg, Wood Co., O. [Ohio]) 186?-1965, 1877-03-02
Speech Of Stanley Matthews ,

Speech OF Stanley Matthews.
The following is an abstract of the
speech Of Judge Matthews, of Cincinnati,
before the Electoral Commission, in the
Oregon case;
lie commenced with denial that they
had asserted in the Florida case that the
certificate was final and conclusive, and
said they had undertaken to draw line
of demarkation between the act of the
State and Federal authority which took
the matter up after it had left the State.
They also undertook to draw line be.
tween things and proofs, between the
certificate and thing certified to; to show
that the certificate was but the shadow,
the thing certified being the substance,
and that where the certificate did not
show the thing certified truly it should
be corrected. II was q surprise, he said,
to find that their adversaries had not
only taken their position on the Florida
and Louisiana cases, but had gone be.
yOnd 1t and accepted dogma which they
had improperly ascribed to the side with
which he was identified He maintained
that they stood to-day on the ground
they occupied in the beginning and
which had been hallowed by the decision
of this tribunal, viz. that q certificate
based on the returns was conclusive evil
dence of election. In the Florida and
Louisiana cases offers to go behind the
returns were menacing, and the offers
grew stronger and larger as the certainty
obtained that they would not be called to
make them good, and great deal of
patriotic Indignation was INDUCED in at
the alleged countenanCing of fraud and
wrong.
Judge Matthews read an extract from
the decision of Justice Field, in the
case of Bradley u.s. Fisher, in which the
tendency to complaint by the party de-
feated is shown. Going on from COM
plant to charges of improper motives,
he entered protest against the hollow
pretensions to morality that had been
made the substratum of complaint in
this case. Cronin had been mounted on
a pedestal for public admiration by his
inventor, as model of the purity and
honesty of elections, and there was no
offer to prove that he was paid $4,000
under prctensc of expenses to Washing.
ton. There was no offer to prove the
contents of the supposed hieroglyphic
characters that could not be read. There
was no offer of proof that this was the
result of a deep-laid scheme to defeat
the will of the people. He wondered,
when his friend Hoadley referred to
Webster and Worcester last night, he
did not produce that little pocket die
tionary and show the correspondence
between Gramercy Park, New York,
and Salem, Oregon.
He contended that the Governors GER
tificate fell to the ground when it was
shown it was not warrant to the
electors for the performance of their
duties. The law of Oregon required that
the votes for electors should be given,
received, returned and canvassed the
same as for members of Congress, and
in the case of members of Congress it
was made the duty of the Secretary of
| State to canvass the votes, and there the
statutory directions end. The statute
in relation to electors further provided
that the Secretary of State should certi-
| fy two lists, showing who had received
the highest number of votes, and there the
canvass ended. The Constitution and
law stamped that record as the legal and
constitutional result of the election.
They had made proffer of the thing
itself; not the proof of the thing, but the
actual and substantial result of the can
vass. That was the appointment of the
State, investure by the State of real rank
and title. All else was mere proof, mere
prima facie evidence to be taken as proof
only until confronted by proof and shown
to be false. The certificate of the Gov
ernor was sought to be introduced here
as a substitute for the canvass. 1t was
signed by the Secretary of State simply
as an attesting witness, and not as can
vasser of votes. He contended that it
was well-settled principle of law that
the certificate of the Governor of Oregon
did not conform to the statutes of the
United States or of Oregon. Suppose
the certificate had been authorized. 1t
gave the election to Odell, Cartwright
and Cronin, body of three persons, to
meet, consult, deliberate and vote
together in a college which necessarily
consisted of three. He contended that
one could not act as of the body, and
that the act of quorum could only be
accepted as the act of the body. This
view of the case had been sustained in
the Supreme Court of Oregon.
In regard to what constituted a va
cancy he cOntended that when the OBJ
ject was to keep up the body to the full
number, for the protection of the inter
est of the people, when it was sought tc
guard against every possibility of the
college not to be full, the word other
wise should be construed literally, anC
that it was intended to cover all vacan
| ~ has sr,ht ha
was acompetent tribunal to set aside thu
election, then vacancy existed which
the remaining members were empowered
to fill.
Judge Matthews combatted the propo
sition that the ineligibility of Watts
made a non-election, or that the votei
cast for the ineligible candidate wer
void. He also contended that Englisl
decisions which declared that the candi
date who was eligible, but received les
number of votes than his ineligible op
ponent, was elected, had not beel
adopted as the American rule, whicl
was that when such case occurred
neither was entitled to the office. If
however, an ineligible officer was oh
jected to by nobody, his official act
stood as long as he held office. In rela
tion to selfexecution of the Constitu
tion, he argued that unless there wa
legislative provision it could not be exc
cuted. The prohibition OF States from
making laws impairing contracts coul'
never be executed but for Legislation
which gave the courts judicial power t.
try alleged violations of the provisions
Mr.. Matthews closed with the declara
tion that he had appeared, not a
counsel for any party, but in support o
great constitutional principle, regard
less of any popular clamor that might b
excited. For Governor to take upol
himself executive, judicial and legis
lative powers was to bring about a com
plication that would make confusion O
InrnrnnnnnA i,nN rinn hln