The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1877-02-09

fatal consequences we have indicated.
But, apart from the Louisiana case,
which has not been developed as yet,
the point upon which we mainly rely
and which we have always considered
the strongest point In the Democratic
case from purely legal and constitu-
tional point OF view, however humili-
ating 1t may be to have to depend upon
what some persons characterize as q
mere technicality, Is that which relates
to the ineligibility Of several Republi-
can electors. The constitution Ia ex-
plicit In Its declaration that "no person
holding any Office of trust or profit
under the United States shall be APP
pointed an eleotor."
It Is charged by the Democrats that
Humphreys, one ct the Hayes electors
In Florida, was an offlceholder at the
time Of the election, but evidence to the
contrary was presented to the Commits
sion yesterday, and since there Is great
doubt as to the fact, we dismiss his case
from consideration. With respect to
Brewster, however, one Of the pretend
ed electors in this State. and Watts, the
Oregon elector, there IL not the slight
est doubt as to the fact that they were
offlceholders ct the time Of their cleo
ton, and the only defense they have to
make against the charge Of ineligibiiity
Ia that they resigned their Offices before
they acted as electors. This defense
raises the question whether their dis
qualification operated as failure to app,
point, or created vacancy that could
be filled by the remaining electors.
Upon this point we have two recent
precedents. In the States of Vermont
and Rhode Island two ineligible cleo
tors were voted for. The Governor
OF Rhode Island referred the matter to
the Supreme Court Of the State, and
that court decided that the ineligibility
of the elector did not create vacancy,
but constituted u failure to elect. There
upon the legislature was convened and
elected fourth elector for Rhode Is
land. In Vermont the same course was
pursued. But In Louisiana and Oregon
the case was entirely different. Brew
ster and Watts pretend to have re-
signed, but we know that the former
certainly continued to act as United
States Surveyor General up to the 9Th
of December. and, indeed, has con-
tinued to act as such up to the present
day. Therefore, he was constitution
ally disqualified, and his vote can never
be counted for Hayes. The Supreme
Court of the United States, in q deci-
sion rendered quite recently, held that
an officeholder, Notwithstanding he
may have resigned his position, re-
mains an office-holder until his sue
cessor qualities and takes his place.
This Is decision directly in point, and
we cannot see how it can be disregarded
by the five Justices of the Electoral
Commission.
The foregoing hastily prepared re-
marks embody some Of our views on the
electoral question as 1t now stands. OF
course, In specializing upon the matter.
we proceed upon the assumption that
Judge Bradley will continue to act in
non partisan manner. or course. IL he
should be guilty Of so debasing himself
and degrading his high position rs to
descend to the low level Of q mere Rad
ical politician, 1t would be useless to ar
que the question Of the disputed Presi-
dency from the standpoint Of law and
right, but as yet we see no reason for
assuming that he will SO act, and we
therefore remain firm In the conviction
that the right will yet prevail over
fraud and INSCRIPTIONS craftsmanship.