The Cheyenne daily leader. [volume] (Cheyenne, Wyo.) 1870-1884, 1877-02-20
CONGRESSIONAL.



were in the chamber when the session
was resumed at 10. In reply to ques-
tion of Withers the president pro tenn.
said the House will be ready to receive
the Senate for the purpose of resuming
the count of the electoral vote at IL.
Withers inquired if it was in order
to move a further recess until that
hour. The president pro tenn. replied
that it would not, the Senate having
already taken one recess from Saturday
until this forenoon, could not take a
second one until another question was
raised in joint meeting.
At 1856 the Senate repaired to the
House of Representatives, headed by
its officers.
Upon returning, the President pro
TEN said that objection having been
made to the decision on the vote of
Louisiana, the two houses had separa-
ted to deliberate in regard to that de-
cision, and unless some Senator asked
it., he would not direct the decision and
objections thereto to be read again.
Davis said the papers should be read.
Sargent said that if all the papers
were to be read the two hours allowed
for discussion would be consumed, and
there would be no time left for debate.
The president pro tenn decided that
the time occupied by the reading of the
papers would not be taken out of the
two hours allowed for debate. The
two hours would run from the time the
debate in the Senate was actually be-
gun.
Sherman submitted resolution that
the decision of the Commission upon
the electoral vote of the State of Lou
isiana stand as the judgment Of the
Senate, the objections made thereto to
the contrary Notwithstanding.
Debate was begun by Mason, who
said the decision of the Commission
was partly in favor of fraud and against
truth and justice, and it would be con-
demned by the people for all time.
The discussion was continued by
Herman, Thurman and Bayard, on the
same side, and by Sherman, Morton
and Logan in favor of the decision.
At $3.50 the Senate took recess un-
til tomorrow.
HOUSE.
WASHINGTON, Feb. 19.-House met
and took recess until the arrival of
the Senate at IL, when the joint meet
ing of Congress was resumed to receive
the report from the electoral commits
sion on the question OF the Louisiana
electoral vote, which report was SUBJ
mitted in writing, signed by majority
of the Commissioners.
The decision was then read. 1t re-
cites that the Commission has, by
majority vote, decided that the electoral
votes of Louisiana must be counted for
Hayes and Wheeler.
The decision having been read, the
Nar yaI rl,afI Inr hnr
were any objections to the decision.
Gibson presented objections to the de-
cision on the ground that the Commits
sion had refused to receive evidence
which had been offered, and had de-
cided that votes mentioned in certifi-
Gates l and 3 should be counted for
Hayes and Wheeler, such evidence to
the contrary Notwithstanding. The
paper recites at great length the pro-
ceedings of the Commission, but the
point of it is the rejection of evidence.
1t is signed by most of the Democrats
in both houses.
The reading of the paper occupied
just an hour. 1t was the dryest of le-
gal documents, full of repetitions of
the various forms in which evidence
had been offered to, and refused by the
Commission. No one after the first five
minutes made the slightest pretense of
listening to OF attempting to under
stand it. A hum of conversation pre-
vailed on the floor and in the crowded
galleries to such an extent that the pre-
siding officer several times appealed for
order and silence. Finally, when the
reading was ended, opportunity was
given members who had not signed the
paper to step to the clerks desk and af-
fix their names. This used up more
time and added to the uproar.
The confusion became so great upon
the floor that the presiding officer final
ly entertained motion for recess,
which then prevailed.
At 12:45 the joint convention was
again called to order and the presiding
officer asked whether there were any
further objections to the decision.
Senator Wallace presented objections
which we're read.
They are: First, that the decision is
in violation of electoral act in this, that
by the act the commission is required
to decide whether any and what votes
from such State are the votes provided
for by the constitution, and what per-
sons were duly appointed electors, yet
the commission refused to examine and
ascertain who were duly appointed elec-
tors in and by the State of Louisiana,
and what votes from that State are
within the provisions of the constitu-
tion of the United States.
Second, because the act creating the
commission was passed to the end that
the commission would hear and exam
inc the evidence and honestly decide
what electors in any disputed State
were fairly and legally chosen, whereas
the commission refused to hear and
consider evidence offered to show that
electors whose vote the commission had
decided should be counted were not
duly chosen, but that they had falsely
and fraudulently acted, and also refus-
ed the offer to show that the pretended
certificates of election were procured by
corruption and were wholly untrue,