Bristol news. [volume] (Bristol, Va. & Tenn.) 1867-189?, 1877-02-13
TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 10, 1877.
RICHMOND LETTER.
House or DELEGATES, ]
RICHMOND, VA, :
Eeh. Sth. 1877. J

Fcb. Sth. 1877.
Last evening at o'clock the news
that the Electoral Commission had
rendered a preliminary decision fell
upon the city like a stroke Of pa"aIy-
sis. From lip to ear and from group
To group the Intelligence flew that by
a stlick party vote the Commission
had determined not to g. behind the
certificate of Gov. Stearns. Even the
second issue or the Evening state had
little effect in subduiug an indignant
pubIic opinion. And now, "a | write,
there sccIns to be with the average
democrat no disposition to let up on
the Supreme Justices for what il
their partisan course. must confess
| have not from the first seen any
thing to justify the prevalent despon-
dencv. Here is the decision, UCrJutin7. 7.
On motion of Mr.. Justice Miller:
Ordered, That no evidence will be
received or considered by the Commits
sion which was not submitted to the
ioint committee of the two houses by
the President of the Senate with the
different certificates. except such as re-
latcs to the eligibility Of f. G.. Hum
phrcys. one of the electors.
On motion of Mr.. Abbott:
RcsOiUCd, That in the case of Flori-
da this Commission will receive the
evidence relating to the eligibility of
Fred. &. Humphreys, one of the per
sons named in certificate No. ! as
CleCtOr.
Now, instead of declaration that
the returns must not be gone behind,
! maintain that the Commission have
determined to do just that very thing.
They have determined that they
would not go outside the documentary
evidence submitted with the returns,
but this includes the examination Of
all three of the returns and the quo
warrauto decision of the Florida
Court.
do not gee any sufficient reason to
regard the course of Judge Bradley as
purely partisan. The determination
to 90 into any and all the evidence
touching the ineligibiity of Elector
Humphreys is in favor OF the demo-
Gratis, 1t opens the Louisiana case
and also the Oregon case to assault. -
There are able and well balanced
democratic here who agree with me
IN these views, and they even go 50
far as to say that it will he difficult to
show that these two decisions of JUS
tIce Bradley are not altogether right.
am not sure of our success and have
not been heretofore, but my hopes
have been reasonably good, and they
are not at all diminished by this pre-
liminary decision. OF course the final
result will depend upon the decision
of the five justices. or at least ma
jority of them. am very well salts.
fled that their decisions will not be all
made on any party line, but that they
will studiously avoid any such weak
ness.
The Senate has made the question
Of re-apportionment the special order
for next Tuesday. In the House the
Canal BILL as passed in the Senate,
looking to the railroad connection be-
tween the Canal at Buchanan and the
&. & O II. r., at Clifton Forge, came
up yesterday as the special order
Mr.. Popham, of RappahannoCk,
though in favor of the Senate bill, Of
tcrcd the report of the special House
committee for the lease to Mason &
Co., and the completion Of the water
line as substitute. This he did, |
presume to imperil the success OF the
lease, to which he is opposed.
The Richmond delegates are oppos-
ed to the lease and in favor of the Sen
ate bill, Mr.. Dooley. in speech OF
considerable force attacked the lease as
impracticable, and though he made a
very good headway in showing ii to be
imperfect and difficult of execution, he
fails to show any thing better I am
very much of the opinion that the ca
nal ought to be preserved to the State,
and that in the course Of some twenty
years it ought TO be made 30 profitable
as to lift taxation almost wholly from
the shoulders of our people. | am
equally sure that If some prompt ac'
ton be not taken the canal will be lost
to the State.
On Tuesday the House, by large
vote, determined to re-appOrtion the
state and sent the bill to the Senate,
with the result above stated. Although
could not see for myself that we had
any such power, yet in view of the
great preponderance of opinion the
other way and of the opinions OF
many Of the ablest lawyers on the
hoor | waved my own opinions and
voted for the measure.
As to our Road law, myself and Mr..
'oale felt much embarrassed We
have many letters and but one peti-
ton on the subject. The one petition
ITom Bristol is adverse to il. The let
'ers from leading men in the country
are not agreed. Not one word of COM
paint, a. | now remember, has reach
ea Us from the upper end of the conn'
" : on the contrary, the letters from
mat section favor It, as 90 some from