The Cincinnati daily star. [volume] ([Cincinnati, Ohio]) 1875-1880, 1877-02-22
THURSDAY EVENING" FEBRUARY %. 1877

~ lGO1IXA Il AV 1l4XA4NN
letter from Underwood, stating that In
accordance with Instructions OF the 14th
inst. he had taken charge Of the office on
the evening OF that day. Other tele-
grams and letters were produced to
show the details in connection with the
resignation OF Watts and the appoint
ment and qualification Of his successor.
DR.. John W. Watts was called, and
testified to the same facts relative to
his resignation and the acceptance
thereof. Mr.. Underhill took possession
and removed the office to the drugstore
Of Littlefield & Hill on the morning of
the following day. Had had no connec-
tion with the Post-ofioe since that day.
Mr.. j. NJ. McGrew, the Auditor OF the
Post.ofice Department, was then called
and testified that the accounts of Watts
had been adjusted and settled to and in
cluding the 14th of November.
ARGUMENTS CONTINUED.
Mr.. Evarts commenced his argument
at half-past l with claim that the
course pursued on that side In connec-
ton with this case was consistent with
their claims in the Florida and Louisi-
ana cases.
In those cases the certificate had been
in accordance with the canvass, and
they held now that the certificate should
conform to the canvass, these two con-
forming 10 the evidence was conclusive.
HOUSE.
The House met at 10 O'Clock in Com
mittee of the Whole on the Sundry Civil
Appropriation Bill.
The following business was trans
acted yesterday after going to prees
with our last edition:
THE ELECTORAL COMMISSION.
Judge Clifford asked who appeared as
objectors on the two sides. Senator
Kelly announced that himself and Mr..
jerks would appear as objectors to GER
titicate No. /, and Senator Sargent an
nounced that Senator Mitchell and Mr..
Lawrence would appear as objectors to
certificate No. 2.
Senator Kelly then made the objection
to the Hayes certificates, and Was TO-
lowed by Representative jerks on the
same SIDE. Senator Mitchell then made
the objections ON behalf OF the Repub-
licans, and was followed by Mr.. Law
renee on the same side.
argument the Commission adjourned
till 1880 O'Clock.
The Commission reassembled in the
Senate Chamber at 1880. Mr.. Merrick
announced that Judge Hoadiy and
himself fwoud d appear for the Democratic
side. Mr.. Evarts said Judge Stanley
Matthews and himself would appear for
the Republican side.
Judge HoadIy then addressed the
Commission. He claimed the principles
controlling this case had already been
decided in the cases OF Florida and Lou
isiana. Oaly such documents aud pa
pers as, il offered a!iunde, would be
competent to be received. may be con.
sidered when found within the en-
yelopes sent 10 the President OF the
Senate, and the decision OF The Return
ing Board acted upon by the Governor +
OF the State is final and conclusive. Mr..
Hoadly said: "My proposition Is that
the State OF Oregon, through the State
officers, has spoken, and the result OF
that speech is here in the
certificates given to Cronin,
Odell and Cartwright. They
are the only legitimate, lawful evidence
OF the acEof Qc2sun III this mailer.
submit. that the certificates or list
signed by the Governor or Secretary of
State OF Oregon, and delivered TO The
College Of Il eclOrs, is final and conclu-
sive evidence. Why was the Governor
and Secretary required to sign these
lists? 1t is because the Chiet Exeeu-
tive OF the State and the canYassing Off.
Ger should unite In declaring who is
elected; and, when thus signed, their
signatures give it the conclusive and
hual evidence which is required"
Commissioner Thurman inquired who,
by the laws of Oregon, has custody o.
the great seal OF that State?
Judge Hoadly said he could not all
swer that question:.
Judge Matthew'S said it was the Sec
relary OF State, under the Constitution.
Judge Hoadly said that was probably
correct, but he would add that there was
nothing i'll the laws OF Oregon which au-
thorlzed any such certificate OF exem-
plltication as is presented by the sup
porters OF certificate No. l. Dir. HOadly
argued that the action throughout was
legal, ana continuel: Il say Cronin was
elected. Testing by method, woulu
a quo warranto run in favor OF
Watts? Would not the di> qualifi-
cation have killed his title? Could
he by quo warranto or certiorari, by
contest, obtain the seat? Cronin held
IT de JQct0. WatLS WAS POSTMASTER,
disqualI1ied. Test it now by method:
On What principle Of law could John
Watts, who did not hold this commits
sion from any court of justice in this
land, have got the title to which he now
lays clain2 Cronin held the title
Cronin cast the vote. Would you have
awarded the position to man who the
oi your country says should
not hold it? On principle, the mandate
TO elect is fulfilled by the election of
Cronin. Test it by method, and tell Inc
how any lawyer eau say that q disQual-
itied candidate can selze the office by
any process known to the law OF our
country. out Of the hands OF one who
nolds i; de facto. He may have Il judg-
ment thai Lne Office is vacant, and thai
1t Is the end OF the whole thing so far as
he is concerned Hoadly stated the Com
mission excluded ev .dence i'll The Florida
and Louisiana cases, because it was
without judicial power, and said with
out the exercise OF judicial power you
can not deprive Tllden and Hendricks
of the one vote cast for them in Oregon.
Without the exercise of judicial power
you can not award it 10 HAYES anu