The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1877-02-22
Remarks Of Mr.. Thurman.

!
vacancies that might occur 1t devolved
upon these five men to say who should
hold office in the State. The question
who should hold Office depended not up
on the will of the people, but upon the
will of the Returning Board, He believ'
ed such Board was utterly destructive
of republican form ofgoyernment. The
State of Louisiana, under the constitution
| had no power to create such q Board. The
acts of that Board were unconstitutional,
null and void. Even if its acts were not
unconstitutional, they were not legal in
canvassing the vote of the 7th ofNovem-
Der last because the statute required that
the Board should be composed Of five
persons of different political parties, but
in fact it was composed of but four per
sons, all Of the same party, and they
steadily refused to fill the vacancy. The
duty of the Board was to canvass and
compile the returns of the Commission
ers of Election, but the testimony showed
they did not do so. The proof which
counsel offered before the Commission
should have been accepted, and in that
opinion he was fortified by the action of
both houses of Congress four years ago,
in rejecting the vote of Louisiana. He
then referred to the alleged ineligibility
of certain electors in that State, and said
he couldn't regard that other than as a
notification of the Constitutional provl-
sion on that subject. Under this decision
no matter by what fraud man might be
elected President or Vice President, or
how ineligible an eleCtor might be, there
was no power to inquire into it. The
vote of the ineligible elector must be
counted Neither q State or Congress
could right the wrong. He utterly dis
sented from such decision as being de-
structive to republican government,
The decision would have the effect of a
proclamation to dishonest Returning
Boards to perpetrate whatever villainy
their interests might dictate with the alb
solute certainty that they would be sue
cessful,
At the conclusion of Mr., Thurman's re-
marks, Messrs. Sherman and Morton
spoke at length, favoring concurrence
with the decision of the Commission.
Remarks of Mr.. Bayard.
Mr.. Bayard said as member of the
Electoral Commission he had given all
that he could give of earnest study, pa
tient labor and devotion to secure just
execution ofthe law under which he was
appointed. His labors and his efforts
had been crowned by failure. Deep was
his sorrow and poignant his disappoint-
ment. He mourned his failure for his
country's sake, for it seemed to him not
only did this decision of eight members
of the Commission level in the dust all
essential safe guards thrown around the
election of Chief Magistrate, but it an.
nounced to the people of the land that
truth and justice, honesty and morality
were no longer the central basis of their
political power.
Remarks of Mr.. Wallace.
Mr.. Wallace said the Senator from
Ohio (Sherman) says that no lawyer as
serted the right to 90 behind the returns,
but the records show that he himself said
that this bill gave that right when he re-
sisted its passage, and two of the Com
mission, Morton & Garfield in debate, OPP
posed the bill because it gave that right.
The rejection of this fraud by the Com
mission admitted its truth. This is
sound law and the Republican party can
not now say the facts are not as we state
them, gross and papable fraud on the
people of Louisiana, and through them
on the American people. If false and
forged returns made by four men, of
whom one is too weak to be knaye,
another tricky, INSCRIPTIONS and de-
faulter in public Office, a third sharper
who cheats at keno and defrauds his
State and the fourth confessedly guilty
and indicted for forging dead mems names
on the pay rolls of his city; if these re-
turns, certified by an executive, whose
only title to his place is sthe Federal bayo.
net are to be conclusive proof OF titleto the
Presidency, then a government of law is
supplanted by one of force and fraud.
The laws of the people whom l represent
are based on common right, common JUS
tice and common sense, and they believe
that the end of legal proceedings is the
attainment of justice, They will not re-
spect decision that refuses to hear truth
that endorses falsehood, sustains forgery
and places the Federal Government at
the mercy of the base. They will and
they should agitate for its reversal. The
result before us is ftly reached. 1t is
the decree ofparty wrong by party fealty
from a judicial tribunal UPON Il purely
legal question. May we never look upon
its like again.
Mr.. Sargent, in the course of his re-
marks, said that frauds had been COM
mitted in Louisiana by Democrats, and it
it was by such means that they expected
to seize the Presidency. 1t was by such
means that few days ago the assassin
attempted, in the State House Of Louisi-
ana, to take the life of Ia man whom more
than one half of the people of the State
had elected Governor. daughter on the
Democratic side,)
Mr.. Sargent looking towards Mr..
Withers] said the Senator might laugh
at that fact. Did the Senator laugh at
the fact that one of his party papers in
this city yesterday counselled the assassi-
nation Of Governor Hayes.
Mr.. Withers. No; | do not laugh at
that.
Mr.. Sargent. Does the Senator laugh
at the fact that his party is responsible for
the assassination of Abraham Lincoln?
Does the Senator deny thatP
Mr.. Withers. Yes, sir, l deny it, fairly
and squarely.
Mr.. Sargent, resuming, said the Demo-
cratic party was stained all over with the
crime of assassination. 1t had assassina-
ted from the best man God ever created,
Abraham Lincoln, down to the poorest
negro in Mississippi.
Mr.. Withers said before replying to the
TRADE of the Senator from California, he
desired to state that he supported the bill
for the creation of the Electoral Commits
sion in the hope that the members drawn
from the Judicial department Of the
would give the subject
fair, judicial consideration, but he was
mistaken. This decision had demon
strated the fact that members of South