New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1877-03-05

not occur TO him that there might possibly BIZ
n trick in the proposition to take testimony
which with all its appearance OF FAR play
made, if not an absolute certainty OF Mr.. III
denis election, at least Il certainty OF the de-
feat of Hayes. Until the trick was eX-
posed or until the lapse of time laid II
bare, il was well enough for the conspirators
to keep up their clamor well enough because
il did not seem absolutely ridiculous and abb
surl. But we submit that there has been
enough of it. The farce il played out. 10
keep it up longer is a reflection upon the III
telligence of the people. Everybody sees now
that tie game as proposed by Mr.. 1lldehs
supporters was what the gamblers call "a dead
"sure thing for their candidate; as clear a
case of "dead open and shut" as was ever
played upon a traveller.
Within two days of the end of the present
and the beginning of the new Presidential
term, the Commission had just passed South
Carolina The margin was exceedingly small.
This, notwithstanding the Commission trans
acted its business with all possible DIS
match consistent with fair hearing and proper
dciberation, and notwithstanding The further
facts that factous delays had not been interposcd
and no testimony such as the Democrats wished
the Commission to 20 into had been taken
This is the feature of the situation
which ought to be sufficient to put
an end to all the clamor about misrcpreSenta-
ton and bad faith on the part OF the Repnb"
Leans. For at the very moment that MI
Hewitt was uttering his rcproaches OF Mr.. Hoar
for voting against pr0ionging the myeStl-
CATION by taking testimony, and the Demo-
Gratis in the House were making bcar-Sarden
of the Representatives, chamber because the
Republicans of the Commission had as they
charge acted in bad faith, 1t was plain to
every intelligent person III the country
that under decision to go behind
the returns and take testimony there
could have been but one result, and that the
the defeat of Hayes, and possibly the election
of Tilden by the Democratic House Of Repre-
scntatives through a failure to finish the count
before the 4th of March. The dising"nu0ns-
ness of the whole scheme in this regard has
been manifest from the beginning to many Of
the Republicans iii Congress vino opposed 1t.
No matter what were the Republican claims
or how sound the basis of justice and right
upon which they rested, they would not have
had the ghost of IL chance had the Commission
ruled according to the wishes Of the cOnspira-
tors and decided to enter upon an inycSuga-
ton which could not by any possibility be
concluded within the limited time allowed
them.
1t is waste Of time and words for Mr.. Hewitt
or any one else to say that Mr.. IIoar or any
other Republican on the Commission was
blind enough OF foolish enough to throw away
the game in advance in any such way. 1t is
not reasonable; it Is not consistent with the
theory of a partisan tribunal about which there
has been so much defamation in Congress
and so much nonsense in the press. Doubtless
there is Il good deal of truth in the theory. We
confess we have not Observetany very marked
willingness to sacrifice paItsanship on either
side. TIE TRIBUNE did not expect it, and
so stated before the Tribunal was organized.
But the men i'll Congress who favored this
mode of settlement, though they may be par
tisans, are not fools by any means and when
Mr. Hewitt charges that any of them said In
discussing the plan of settlement, "Make this
"a game of heads you win, tails we loSc,' he
talks wildly. His assertion does not damage
the cretlibilty of the gentlemen on the other
side who deny it A; but it does damage his own
reputation by taxing too severely the crcdulity of
the public All this talk about Republicans
having conceded ut any time the point that
the Commission should take testimony is the
unreasonable rant of disappointed and angry
men. Ii proceeds upon the theory that the
Rrpublicans either were fools or ready to give
away their case for had testimony been
admitted, it would have made no differ
ence if it had been piled mountains
high and all in favor of Hayes the
4th of March would have found the count
unfinished, and we should have had either n
new election or by some revolutionary pro-
cecsling the Inauguration of Iidcn under the
color of an election by the House. 1t is not at
all likely that the Republicans threw away
their chance at the outset, and we submit that
our Democratic friends are talking nonsense
when they say thcy did.