The Rutland daily globe. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1873-1877, 1877-02-06

| INTO VOteB as cast IN the state. Inc novelty,
as have said, of the situation produces
strange results. Never before has there
been rotardation of the political transac-
ton of counting the votes at election, and
to accomplish that almost miracle has been
needed, for the sun and moon have been
made to stand still much longer than they
were for Joshua in his conflict in Judea, and
you will find that the attempt to bring
| judges, do not now speak OF judges In
the official capacity that some portion of
this bench occupy in the supreme court,
but mean judges in nature of function
and exercise }, into the working Of this
scheme of popular sovereignty in its po-
litical view, will Nuke it as intolerable,
will defraud and defeat 1t (by the nature of
that Intervention not by the character OF
the particular transaction of the judges
till the government of the judges will have
superseded the sovereignty of the people
and there will be no cure, no resort but that
which the children of Israel had to pay for
king. Mr.. Evarts, in closing, referred
the com mission to numerous authorities.
CHARLES ocoNNoR's SPEECH.
Charles O'Connor followed on behalf of
the democratic side, and in opening refer
red TO the gravity of the case to be decid-
ed by the commission and TO the high
| character of that tribunal. He said, in
reference to the question what elements
were within the reach of the commission,
counsel on the two sides stood in direct
conflict He contended that the commits
sion had right, by just and proper meane,
to inquire what was the vote OF Florida,
while the other side maintained it must re-
tain the returns certified to by
the governor. The powers of the
commission were fully expressed in the
electoral bill and give the commission the
same power as the two houses acting to-
gether or singly, and this brought up the
question, what were the powers of the two
houses acting separately or together touch
ing the electionp That no power Of any
description deserving the name of power to
investigate resided in the president of the
senate is most palpable on the very words
of the constitution. He is authorized to
receive certain packets. He has no au-
thority whatever by the constitution save
and except only to present himself to the
two houses and before them to open those
packets. (The word is Certificates but
it means these packets) He has no right to
open them at any other time and no power
to inquire, to take testimony or inquire
into them, his duties ARE mainly clerical.
The vice-president was required to receive
the certificates. They were to bear no ear
marks to designate what they were. The
constitution required that he open all GER
tifcates that come to him indicative of be-
ing such. There ends his duty, but when
we come to the count we are not told that
there shall be count of all the certificates
but that the votes shall be counted. This
implies preliminary inquiry. What were
the votesp No constitutional provision
was made as to the mode of counting and
it was lett by implication for those who
were to act officially on the result.
he would not dispute that congress by
united action might have constituted some
body or given some individual power to
make this investigation, but they had not
done so. Prior to this occasion law as
construed by his side vested in the two
houses in the contingency here presented,
the power to do whatever may be needful
for the accomplishment of justice. The
argument in opposition was the inconven-
fence of taking the necessary trouble, and
that such investigation would lead, if the
parties thought fit to do it, to the investi-
gvtion of the personal qualifications of
every one of the electors among 400, 000,-
900 people, and that if you lay down rules
and adopt the principle that you have the
right to investigate at al! you open the door
to that inconvenient and boundless sea of
litigation. This practically meant that it
was better to permit an usurper to become
president by fraud than take the trouble TO
inquire into his title. Such an argument,
he urged, had no application, as it might
with equal justice be urged in every quo
warranto case, and in almost every judicial
proceeding, as the commission as well as a
court of law, had the discretion to limit in
quiry. He submitted that it never was the
the intention of the trainers of the consti-
tuition to prevent congress from interposing
between the people and fraud and injus-
tice, or to leave it without the power of q
person disqualified from acting as presi-
dent. He discussed the question as to
the value to be placed on the
governors certificate. saying it seemed
to .be virtually conceded that it was not
conclusive, not being required by the con-
stitution but only by act Of congress. He
cited numerous authorities In support of
his position, and referring to the action of
the canvassing board said he proposed to
show that they acted beyond their power
and that the governors certificate was ut
terly false. He claimed that the commits
sion had the right 10 investigate this mat
ter and decide whether the Hayes electoral
vote is valid. He then proceeded to con-
slider the doctrine Of an officer de .Glcto,
which he said was the main reliance of the
other side,an argued that it was only in acts
affecting private persons and where the
act of the officers de JactO Is perfected and
has taken effect that such acts were es.
teemed valid. He maintained that al
though there may be an officer de facto
there cannot be an unauthorized tribunal
de laeto, and the electoral college that vot.
ed for Hayes had no element of legality
and were merely pretenders. The Tilder
electors, although they had no documenta.
ry evidence to establish their title, had &C,
tually been elected and performed all the
duties although without the governors GER