The Rutland daily globe. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1873-1877, 1877-02-03
THE ELECTORAL COMMISSION.
Third Days Session.
WAsnrNoTox, Feb. 2.

WASHINGTON, Feb. g.
The electoral commission met at 10 80
The presiding justice said the question had
been asked yesterday what Is the case, to
which he replied that 1t consists of three
certificates with accompanying papers and
objections TO the same He would now
state tina, two Electors on each side would
be allowed to speak on the opening of the
case. Those representing objection num-
Der one, which was presented by Mr.. Field
would speak first, and under the fourth
rule would be allowed two hours. Mr..
Field asked whether after the objectors
had spoken and opening argument was
made any reply would be allowed.
Judge Clifford stated that the rules
made no provision for reply. Mr. Field
then Opened as objector and argued In
favor of going behind the face Of the re-
turns on the ground that If this could not
be done tie American people would be In
the position Of standing pJwerless in the
face Of gigantic fraud. Mr.. Field re-
viewed the action OF tbs Floii ida returning
board, aud Geo. Stevens, and Teld from
evidence ken before tue house committee
to show that votes of precincts had ten
thrown out without particle Of evidence
and upon mere suppOsition or belief that
intimidation had been practcel The votes
of townsville and Daibyville were cited as
instances of that action. He argued that
the paramount question before the commits
sion was whether in the face of such tesi-
mony as this 1t can be claimed that the re-
turns is to be considered as conclus We
and binding. The usual form Of stating
question, "Can you go behind the cert f.
cate ?" Is an erroneous form. The ques-
ton should be reversed 80 as TO read, "Can
the certificate 20 behind the truth aud con-
ceal it ?" There is no pretense that the
vote of the state was not given for Tilden
and Hendricks. The sole pretext for de-
nying the fact being the certificate of
Stearns. They say the truth cannot be
proved as against this certificate. This
includes the proposition that the two
houses of congress have no right either
separately or together to consider or in
quire into any act which Gov. Stearns may
certify to congress. Suppose the governor
shonld become so debased as to corruptly
and falsely certify to congress that one set
of electors have received majority of the
votes of the state. Is there no remedy !?
The constitution nowhere declares that
the certificate of the governor shall be con-
elusive against all proof as to the election of
president. The constitution distinctly de-
clared that it is the person having the high
est number of votes who shall be declared
elected, ard it cannot be rightfully said
that the certificate of a governor of q state
can override this provision of the oonsIitu-
ton. Mr.. Fields cited the case Of Barstow
of Wisconsin to show the propriety OF pro-
ceeding by quo warranto. In that case a
uBurping governor was ousted by the courts
and the rightful governor installed in his
stead. The case was parallel to that of the
governIship OF Louisiana. Mr. Fields
regretted there was 10 similar provision of
bearing upon the question of the presidency
and paid high tribute TO the foresight and
craftsmanship of one member of the com
mission (Morton) for having discovered the
latent difficulty in question of the dispute ed
presidency and labored early TOR its settle
ment.
He was followed by Mr.. Tucker, OF
Virginia. Among the distinguished coun'
sci present are NJ, ssrs. Evarts, Slough
ton and Shellabarger for the republicans
and Messrs. Trumbull and Carpenter fol
the democrats. Charles O'Connor is also
present.. Senator Sargent and william
E. Chandler are assisting the republican
counsel.
Mr.. Tucker followed Mr. Field. He
proceeded to state the various objections tC
the Hayes electors and alluded to the QUO
warrant to Of the It tie of Florida and to thu
decision of the Florida supreme court
THIS decision be argued was sustained b,
au horiies. He regarded the returning
board "a merely one step in the suthorit,
by which the PRONUNCIATION OF election
were made final. The determnalt author
i,y { f he wee allowed to make Il word TO
the occasion) provided by the state o
Florida as the supreme court. Therefor
unless III primary determinant authority
w; the board, is conc lusive not only as t.
It's action but as to the extent of its powe
then we mus. regard the proceeding il
Florida upon the action Of these elector
as part of that deerminant power whc
, the state has provided against fraud an
. Illegally in the exercise of the electiv
function.
A recess was then taken TO ALLOW
Kasson TO examine the credential
which arc ali involved In the objection
Upon reassembling Of the electoral com
| mission Mr. Kssson proceeded 10 state IL
objection to the Tilden certificates. H
said the first certificate opened by congres
l had all the requisites to legality required b
the constitution and the statutes of Flor
, da. The second certificate opened wa
i certified to by an officer not recognized b.
the law of the United States or Florids
: namely, the attorney general, and also b
1 the electors themselves who certify to thei
D own qualifications. The third certificat
opened was entirely er parte tito, being b
an officer not 10 existence unt
8 the functions of the office had been el
hausted. Never before in the history Of Ii
republic had such certificate been sent
: congress. The proceedings of the coul
recited therein were subsequent TO III
time fixed for the performance of judici
functions. He argued if the certificate M
). l was legal expression OF the vote {
n Florida there was no necessity of conside
q | in,, oar,;aoatoa No o and apd ha ahonI