The New York herald., 1877-02-14
william Beach Lawrence ON the
Situa tt0n.

opinions claim to attention, even when
they are biassed by his prejudices. If he
happens to be on the wrong side of an i'm
portant question the breadth of his knowl-
edge and his grasp of legal questions
make it pretty certain that he will put
the arguments for that side in their
strongest form. Without knowing what his
views were on the great topic which
engages public attention, but learning that
he had just returned from Washington, our
correspondent at Newport sought an inter-
view with Mr.. Lawrence, who expressed MS
opinions with entire frankness In the con-
versation which we print in other columns.
Notwithstanding our total dissent from Mr..
Lawrence we think it useful to publish
report of the interview. There is a mi
nority of democrats large, We hope-in
Washington and elsewhere who are so
stung with disappointment that they
would gladly break up the commission.
As vet Mr.. Lawrence is the only
man of ability and distinction who has
cspoused their views and ii it shall be
found that his arguments are easily refutcd
there will be no necessity for wasting space
OH the depocra.ic Hotspurs who rave but
cannot reason.
Mr.. Lawrence holds that the Electoral
Commission is unconstitutional; but this is
not the ground on which he advises that it
be broken up by the withdrawal OF it's
democratic members. He AYERS that it has
abdicated its functions that it has refused
to perform the duties required of it by Con-
gress. If this allegation could be sustained
Mr.. Lawrences advice to break up the COM
mission would be specious. Bnt has the
commission, in fact, disobeyed or evaded the
mandate of Congress? We are constrained
to believe that this charge is made with
out any valid foundation. The arguments
of Mr. Lawrence show that he has not exam
imed the law with any care. He says
'When the reference was made to the CON-
mission they were vested by the very terms
of the law with all the powers necessary to
come to correct conclusion which Con-
gress, or either house of Congress, had pos
sessed The creation of the tribunal was In
itself Legislative declaration Of the right
of Congress to go behind the returns, that
the Investigations which had been made by
the committees OF otherwise were before
them and might be referred to by any of the
parties interested" It is apparent from
these remarks that Mr.. Lawrence has be-
slowed no exact attention on the
phraseology of the Electoral act
It's language is scrupulously guarded. It
studiously abstains from any expression or
even any intimntion us to what evidence it
would be proper for the commission to
consider. 10 be sure. the law authorizes it
to consider the cases with the same powers
possessed by Congress for that purpose, but
it is careful to intimate doubt whether
Congress or either house possesses any such
powers at all 1t says that the commission
may exercise such powers. "if any, as are
possessed by Congress in determining such
questions. Why was this cautious condi-
ton, .'if any," inserted in the act? These
words upset and demolish the theory of Mr..
Lawrence by striking away the foundation
on which it rests. These significant quail
flying words are so important that we will
give them with their context, that the
reader may have clear perception of their
modifying effect:-"All such certificates.
votes and papers so objected to, and all
papers accompanying the same, together
with such objections, shall be forthwith
submitted to said commission, which shall
proceed to consider the same, with the same
powers, if any, now possessed by the two
houses acting separately or together"
And further on, in referring to the
kind of evidence the commission may
consider, the act says that the COM
mission ''may take into view such petit
tions, depositions, or other papers, if any,
as shall, by the constitution and now exist
ing law, be competent and pertinent in such
consideration Now, Mr.. Lawrence seems
to have read the law without attending to
the repeated use of these important modify
ing words, ''if any," Why were they so
carefully inserted in connection with every
species of evidence? The purpose is plain
Congress meant to disclaim any expression
of opinion as to what its own powers in
such case really are, and even al
expression of opinion as to whether
it possesses any powers at ALL 1t left the
commission perfectly free to interpret for
itself that part of the constitution, binding
it by no instructions whatever. The charge
made by Mr. Lawrence that the commission
has violated the law and abdicated the
functions with which Congress clothed il
is, therefore, not merely untenable but
absurd. Mr. Lawrence has read the act as
if the words ''if any" had been left out
although their employment fixes the inter
pretation of the act and gives the commits
sion plenary power to define the extent o.
it's own jurisdiction.
Moreover, the withdrawal of the demo
cratic commissioners is impossible without