Bradford opinion. [volume] (Bradford, Vt.) 1874-1881, 1877-02-24

they had been numbered one two and three,
and directors to numbers one and three would
first DO heard.
The opening argument on the part Of the
Democratic DIRECTORS against tho reception Of
the Kellogg certificates was made by Senator
Mcdonald. II was an analysis of the laws OF
Louisiana, having or claimed to have y bearing
on the powers Of the returning board.
Following Senator Mcdonald, Representative
jerks made an argument on the same side. lie
Illuminated tho important points md presented
an analysis of the action OF the returning board
condemning them for excluding the vote Of
twenty-five polling places In order that the vote
Of the state might be returned for Hayes.
Messrs. Hmlbut and Howe, on the part OF
the Republican electors, claimed that tho gov
ernor's certificate In this case, based as II was
upon the action Of the returning board, was
conclusive, Just ~ had been held In the Florida
case. They said the Kellogg government had
been recognized by the Executive and Lsgisla-
tive departments Of the general government,
and therefore they claimed that John Mem
erys certificate to the return Of the Tilden cleo
toIs Ind no more weight than II It purported to
como from M antediluyian monarch.
Ex-senator Carpenter, Of Wisconsin, opened
| for the Democratic electors, in arguing for the
whole case. Ho protested az he opened that
he did not appear as counsel for Samuel J.
Tilden. He had voted against him once and
il this commission decided TINT there had been
But he was here as the counsel o { ten thousand
voters who had been DISTINGUISHED by fraud in
Louisiana and VIII ose case had been referred to
this tribunal 10 inquire who and what persons
had been duly appointed electors in that State.
This tribunal he argued, was IN the nature Of
legislative commission Of investigation and
had neither judicial nor executive functions,
for its conclusions were all subject to the re-
visionary action OF Congress. II was created
like those commissions out of which British
legislation had grown to correct such frauds on
was peeping out of tho ballot box in England
and were appealing for triumph in this tribunal.
He made an analysis Of the cousive acts Of
Louisiana and declared that the State had
failed to provide the requisite law and its
electoral vote must therefore, be botted out
of the electoral college. Mr.. Carpenter said
that Congress ignored the board four years
ago and delared II II was Il fraud then ii was
fraud now which this tribunal could not
vitalizc.
Mr. Carpenter spoke some minutes in support
of the proposition laid down by him that the
Presidential electors are Federal and not State
officers He read from the State constitution of
Louisiana several sections asserting that they
clearly limit all judicial power to the courts
the judicial power upon the return
ing board must be regarded as fully unconstitu-
tional. Mr.. Carpenter said they would show, il
allowed by tho commission, that not single
parish in Louisiana sent to the returning board
any evidence in the form prescribed by law for
the purpose of throwing out votes on the
ground of intimidation and violence. He read
from the report on Louisiana, signed by Me5srs.
Hoar, Wheeler and Frye, certain passages. lie
said that Mr.. Wheeler would be, lie thought,
very much surprised to find himself counted in
by board which he had joined in condemnng
for doing precisely similar thing. Mr.. Car
penters closing appeal to the commission was
off tn Sfon vii
ana invite the overthrow Of our institutions"
Mr.. Trumbull then offered the evidence on
the Democratic side:
First-That William p. Kellogg, vino appears
as Hayes clector, is the same person who was
de factO governor of Louisiana.
Second-That William Z. Kellogg was not
appointed one of the electors of Louisiana in
1867, and that the certificate was untrue to
facts and to show this certified copies Of the
lists of the commissioners of election.
Third-That the names of the supervisors of
registration were fully and fraudulently omit
ted to the return part of the votes in several
parishes, and that 2,267 votes against Kellogg
were thus omitted.
Fourth--That by the consolidated statement
Of the supervisors of the registration it ap-
pears that the said Kellogg received 3,459 votes
less than each of the Tilden electors
Ffth-That the returning board wilfully and
fraudulently estimated and counted 234 votes,
which We're not given in any precinct of the
State.
Sixth--That the votes cast on the seventh
of November as shown by the commissioners
have never been compiled nor canvassed, and
that said returning board never even pretended
to canvass these returns, and only canvassed
the returns made by the supervisors.
Sevenlh-That the votes given for electors
have never been opened by the governor of the
State in the presence of the secretary of State
thp Acknowledgement of tba Sfata and District
judge at the seat of government, nor has lie
examined the returns and ascertaned whether
any one was elected but that he knew when he
executed the certificates to himself and Others
that he and they had not received within 5000
of as many votes as had been cast for the Tilden
electors.
He proposed fourth to show that in Septem-
her, 1876, Kellogg and others in the city of New |
Orleans. including the members of the return
ing board. entered into an unlawful and crimi- |
nal combination and conspiracy to cause it to
lie certified and returned to the secretary of |
State by the returning board upon their pre-
tended canvass, that Kellogg and others hadre-
ceived majority of all votes cast at that cleo
ton for electors, whether such should be the
fact or not, and that the returning board. in
violation of the law of the State, on the twen-
tieth of November 1872. refused to compile
of votes made by the commissioners
Of election in regard to the election of electors,
DuV CdllNdSS anu COlIlJlie Only lue Gull
Solldated statements and returns made to them
by the supervisors of registration in the sew
eral parishes: and that the board altered,
changed, or forged the consolidated statements
or returns of the supervising registrating Off
rer of the parish of Vernon in the following
manner.
Mr. Tr,mbull proceeded to state the grounds
of objection to five of the Republican electors
and charged that in violation of the Constitu-
ton they held other Offices when elect
ed. Mr.. Trumbul commenced his argument
with a general discussion of the power of Con-
,ress and the commission to prevent an cleo
ton of the President of the United States by
fraud. The commission, he said, is legisla-
tive body, which need not be hampered by any
decide for it-elf in regard to receiving evidence
in this case. He asked: Is this commission
formed merely to add up figures or to examine
and consider all questions submitted and de-
eide according to the law creating it? He held
that the two houses of Congress have decided
hat the certificate of the governor in due
form. as in the Kcllogg-P inchback case, is not
binding upon Congress. All the committees,
he said. who have visited Louisiana and report
I'd to Congress for years reported that the re-
turning board has absolutely no power to do
anything but count and compile the votes, and
hat they have no jurisdiction in the way of re-
ecting votes unless a foundation is laid
md said that in the Connecticut election Gov
,rnor IngersolI certified himself as elector-at-
arge. He held that the fact that Kellogg's
iemand for troops was granted was conclusive
violence of his right of goveror that the re-
turning board had full power to act, and that
t could act as well with -four as with five men,
>crs and held that all questions in Louisiana
IRE determined by the Florida case. He argued
hat the power to take testimony by Congress
; for legislative purposes ionly. and not for the
purposes of an electoral count planted him
self on the letter of the law, and closed with
,harges of intimidation and blood.
Mr.. Shellabarger followed, also for the Re-
i'll legal argument He held that
he returning board had legal right to sit
With -four members, and defended the char
cter of Wells and the other members. He as
erted that the provisions about protests being
ttachcd to the returns was merely directory,
md that these acts could be done ut other
imes-this to justify the preparation Of atiida-
its and protests in New Orleans. He said that
certain things, as violence and impossibility ex-
used the failure or omission to do SO, and pro-
eedcd to say that. under the maxim of law
Which holds that every officer is right until he
$ shown to be otherwise, the returning board
vas right. He added that if wrong was done
Jofn ri, ,oJ Ia IN, tho