Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1877-03-02
NUMBER Sc.
THE ELECTORAL COMMISSION.

THE ELECTORAL COMMISSION.
] THE OREGON CAsE-NR. EyARTs' ARGUMENT
| WASHINGTON, Feb. 22.-Mr. Evarss. ad-
dressing the commission, on behalf oil the
republicans. called attention to the wording
| OF the governors certificate and cOntended
that it did not comply with the act of Con-
gress in that be undertook to insert the
word " eligible before the word election.
to cover himself from the condemnation OF
open and recognized fraud and falsehoOd.
Mr.. Evarts quoted from the laws Of Oregon
to show that when two persons are voted
Tor the one receiving the highest number of
votes should be declared elected, and ar
gued that his disqualification to hold
othce does not elect the other who
receives the next highest number OF votes.
In that case there must be another election.
1t is not question for tho governor to DO
termine. The principle of the college OF
electors is that the majority govern, and
that principle cannot be applied to a less
number than three. One man is not col
lege, and two men cannot be. for there can
not be majority unless there be at least
three. Three makes a college because the
vital principle of the college IL that a ma
iorty exercises the power of the college.
You are bound to determine whether a ma
lority of Q college can fill a vacancy. or
whether minority shall, and cannot help
concluding, that a majority anchors the
college to itself, and that 4 minority Is no
college at all. The law OF Oregon itself
says they shall fill vacancy in the eiecto-
raj college BY plurality of votes. Can YOU
have plurality of votes whom only ono
vote is cast?
Mr.. Abbott inquired what would be the
effect if two electors had died since election
and but one was lett would the state lose
its two votes?
Mr. Evarts replied. in that case the state
ought to exercise the power reserved to 1t,
and treat the election a. having failed. 1t
might be, however, that the vote should be
lost. There is no existing law of Oregon,
or any other state, that in its terms covers
such a case. There can be no college when
you are reduced to one. You have an elector,
| agree, and it is undesirable that the sta e
should lose its vote.
Judge Hoadley asked the counsel if he
considered the word plurality" AZ refer |
ring to the original number elected. or to |
those remaining after u vacancy.
Mr. Evarts replied there was nothing that |
confined it to tho whole numbor, but |
there was clear authority for them
to chose by the plurality of quorum,
according To the ordinary rulr OF corpora
tions, and colleges. that II majority of the
quorum is equivalent to majority of the
whole That this college OF electors was
constituted of two men, legally chosen
has not been blOtted out by any evidence
before the commission. except the certih-
cate of Cronin; but therein CrOnin's evi-
dence fails TO sustain his assertion. that
they refused to act as electors. he pro-
duced no minutes of the transaction. lie
then proceeded to fill their places by his
single vote. Now whether or not that
faculty could rest in single elector IN
some states, the fact is that it does not
rest in a single electOr under the law of
Oregon. The statutes determine that by no
chance should the vote of the state be
lost, and they provide in that way for filling
vacancy in the electoral college. Now
upon examination of all these certificates, |
have been grstifed to find that. although these
operators up in Oregon were as harmless as
serpents. they were not any wiser than
doves. Nothing has been done there that
defeats the constitution of the United
States, or that defrauds Oregon. or that de-
teats the election of the President. All that
has resulted from the attempt to perpetrate
and consummate fraud is to exhibit the
fraud to the public condemnation. but the
safety Of the state remains unharmed.
Mr.. NERRIcK
followed in behalf of the democrats and
said he addressed himself to the tribunal,
believing they would adhere to their pre-
vious decisions and apply the same prin-
ciples to the decision of the Oregon case
that they did to the Louisiana and Florida
cases. lie must consider that the real
meaning Of their Judgment WAS that gov
- .H,,fA tl... nr.A I
ultimate act of the state beyond which they
had no power to go. He argued that in
reference to the ascsrtainment of the result
of appointment Of electors. the law of
Oregon was the same as that of Louisiana
and Florida. and contended that to with
hold q certificate from person deemed by
the governor to be ineligible to the Office
was legitimate performance Of constitu
tional and proper executive trust.
On the point as to who was the real in
cumbent, CrOnin or Watts, on the day the
electors voted, a discussion between the
counsel and various members Of the COM
mission ensued Mr.. Merriek claimed that
as Cronin held a certificate with the seal of
state attached. he had meniment of title
to office, Watts having nothing, or what
amounted to the same. merely an abstract
of votes. cast at the election.
Here followed colloquy between the
commission and counsel IA to the value Of
this abstract which was ended by Thurman
suggesting that the real question was what
was made by the laws uf Oregon a cOnclu
sive act OF the canvass.
Mr. Merrick, resuming his argument, re-
ferrcd to many authorities. He took up
the subject of the vacancy and made the
point that unless the Office had been once
filled there could be no vacancy, and unless
once filled there could be no resignation.
The vacancy alleged to be filled by these
electors was not create d BY Cronin absence
but by Waits resignation. Ii they had pow
er To fill the vacancy at all they executed that
power by filling vacancy created by the
res. nation al Watts, and not by the nOn-
actiun of CrCuin. He said, in conclusion,
consistent ahhe>iuh To the snlemn CON
clu-l0ns reached by these great mon. to
Whum the people have committed the
settlement of their right, IL essential to
the preservation OF loyal respect for au-
thority and character. which, whilst mittI-
eating pangs Of disappointment, often
secures dcq uic>cence in judgments seeming
ly thu hastie-t and most unjust. But
when these judgments antagOnizc one
another. and III them conflict and
antagonism are combined in operative
effect to accomplish one and the same result,
and that result is one with which indi-
vidual sympathies ara clothed, and warm
ly connected. unpleasant thoughts will
stir within the public mind, and angry
emotions will swell the popular heart. The
supreme court OF the United States is one
of the idols OF the people. They have in
their estim ate Oi its character invested 1t
with sanctlty and dignity beyond that of
any other tribunal on the face OF the earth.
They boiove that all other departments OF
the government are liable To deterioration
and possible dehlement, but they look to
the supreme court a. lifted above the cur
rent OF impure air that hoarS upon the sur
face of the earth, and ~ still moved by the
virtues and speaking with the wisdom of
the fathers of the republic. When this faith
is destroyed. night will have come.
SECRET SESSION.