New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1877-01-29

cans who voted against the bill, but who noverthe-
less shared this conviction They wanted the CON-
promise to carry, but shifted the responsibility 10
the shoulders of Drawer men, so that if the scheme
| should not work out favorably to hayes they couiu
| say that they never favored it. x. " b.
| JURISDICTION OF THE COMMISSION.
A BoUYDLEss FIELD or INQUIRY " THEY GO BE-
| HIND THE RETURNING BoARDs-THEY PROBABLY
| WILL NoT-THE BOARDS THEMSELVES TO Bk
| CONSIDERED.
| frRon THE REGULAR CORRESPONDENT OF THE TRibuHsj
WASHINGTON, Jan. 27.-The passage OF the Com
promise Electoral bill and its certain signature ny
the President take it out of the realm OF discusso
It is now virtually and will be finally on Monday
q law eouallv binding upon those who supported it
and those who opposed it, and differences OF opinion
as to its consttntionality aud expcdency have
already given place to conjectures In regard 10 lts
| operation The members of the tripartite commas
sion not named in the act are to be chosen next
Tuesday and the counting of the electoral votes u
TO begin in the hall of the House Of Representatives,
on Thursday afternoon. In the midst OF the excte-
ment of preparation the caucuses and private con-
ferences the negotiations for the assistance OF coa
sci to present the of either party and the prea
ration of evidence to be submitted, 1t is interesting
to pause and to consider what Of the questions
will be that Will necessarily arise when all these
matters have been arranged and the commission
| begins its work.
As the certificates from the States opened in
alphabetical order, the first to be sent to the com
misson under the new law will be those from
| Florida Objection may possibly be made TO COUNT
ing the votes of Alabama and COlorado-to the 1or-
mcr on the ground that the election In that otate
was not a free one, and to the latter because IL
assumed by some Democrats that Colorado Is not
State in the Union All objections of this kind VIII
| ..1al, I,,l1 nv Ia
both houses certainly by the failure of one to sus-
! tain them They may cause temporary delay; they
cannot change the result of the election When the
| two certificates from Florida are received oy
the commission the first question that VIII
| present itself-and it will be the most import
ant one to arise during the whole period OF
the tribunals exisence-w be the limits OF It's Juris-
dicton. All jurisdiction possessed by Congress ac'
ing "a one body or as separate bodies is conferred on
this tribunal bur the law does not undertake to de-
fine that jurisdiction to declare that it exists
at ALL This question has been the real bone OF con-
tention between the two houses; if it could have
| been removed all other controversies might have
been settled without resort to special egislatl"h'
On this point there irrecOncllable differences
which many of the best men of both parties believed
would lead to disastrous controversies If not aica-
bly, adjusted in advance. On the Interpretation OF
the Constitution and the laws touching this ques-
ton which the high commission may adopt hangs
also not only its final decision in each case submitted
to it, but the very outcome of the election ITSELF
There are some doctrines connected with tins
question of jurisdiction even to which i believe
fair men in both parties will assent One of these is
that if Congress does possess aHy constitutional ~
legal right to take cognzance of any fact or paper
| from a State except the returns which have been
made in accordance with the requirements OF tho
! Constitution and the act of 1892, that night must
only be exercised TO extent necessary for the dis
coyery of the votes of that State cast and returned
in accordance with the Constitution and laws of the
| State and the United States. In other words, if
! Congress has right to inquire at all in regard to
the Presidential election in a state, that inquiry
must stop when ii is discovered that any paper pur-
porting to be the returns of tho election is discov-
cred to be such under the Constitution and laws of
the State and of the United States, or when 1t is
established that no such paper exists
Let me illustrate this by the case OF Florida, which
will be the first TO be submitted to the commission,
aud in the consideration of which this question OF
! jurisdiction will have TO be decided. The question
there presented will be which of two sets of returns
! is legal and valid One has the certificate of the
Governor Of the State the other is signed by another
man. II the certificate is the only evidence that is
to be considered, the investigation must stop just
there. There many reasons why majority OF
the leaders OF D0tn paIllcS opponents Us Wen ds au
vocatcs of the Compromise BILL believe that the in
quiry should go further than this. The Governor
may certify to the election of men who were not
elected in accordance with the laws of the State.
as Gov Grover did in the case of Cronin in Oregon
nobody believes that fraud like that ought to go
unchaenged. But if the certificate of the Cover
nor is not to be received As conclusive evidence III
every case, then the commission must go behind
that certificate and admit other evidence.
| In the search for that evidence it will first be
proper to inquire, whenever there is any to
doubt, whether the electors to whom the Governor
gave the certificates were the men who were chosen
inaccorlance with the constitution and laws of the
State. In the of Florida it will take this fOrm
Were they the men declared elected by the Return
ing Board which by The laws of Che State is, under
certain restrictions, the tribunal created for the
determination of the results of electonsf II this
question is answered in the affirmative it seems to
Inc that there is but step further that the inquiry
can 90 and that il to ascertain whether the Return
ing Board acted within its jurisdiction and whether
there proof that acted faudulenty. If the first
of these questions is answered in the affirmative and
the second in the negative, the inquiry will then be
closed and the votes be counted as returned.
| But suppose the Returning Board of Florida or of
any other State, the returns from which are sub
mttcd to the commission, exceeded its jurisdiction
or is proved have. been Influenced in ITS decisions
by corrupt motives, would that invaldate those re-
turns' That would be question for the commits
sion to decide. ] believe it would Let it be
assumed for example, that the laws of Louisiana as
thoy stood at the time of the election required the
votes for Presidential electors TO he canyassed by
certain State officers, with the Governor acting as
chairman of the board while the returns for all other