The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1877-03-01
THIN PERJURED NIGHT.
South Carolina Declared for Hayes
The Decision Creates No Surprise.
Judge Black Expects to See No More
Presidential Electors.
Mr.. Hurd's Objections to the Hayes Certificate.

WASHINGTON, FEBRUARY, Z(.-Ine EIec'
toral Commission met at 10 o'clock, Mr.
Hurd submitted the reasons why the
Commission should reject the Hayes
certificate, holding that republican form
of government must exist in state tc
give validity to the vote of that state
He insisted that if legal disabilities were
imposed, or If intimidation was practiced
a republican form of government was not
maintained, and he proposed to show by
testimony taken by the House Committee
that both conditions existed. Mr.. Hurd
held that as the Constitution of South
Carolina required the registration OF
electors and that requirement was utterly
ignored, the election was void. He next
went to the objection that presence OF
United States troops in the State over
awed the people and prevented a free
expression of the will of the people. He
read the proclamation of the President of
October II, 1875, declaring insurrection
existing in the State, and contended that
the clause of the Constitution authoriz-
ing the interference of the Federal Gov.
ernment contemplated an insurrection
against, or resistance to- State authority,
and not disturbance between individual
citizens of the State or rifle clubs riding
up and down numbering peaceable citi-
zens as stated in the Presidents procla-
nation. He argued that it did not
amount to such insurrection against the
United States or State authorities, as
warranted an Intervention in the affairs
of the State. The presence of troops was
not to keep the peace, but to influence
the election.
When Mr.. Hurd had finished, Mr..
Cochrance stared that Judge Black and
Mr.. Blair would appear as counsel for the
obiectors to the certificate. They had
been uncertain whether they could at
tend, but were now here. Mr.. Cochrane
then submitted certain proffers ofproof,
which he proposed to make good, admit
ted by the Commission as follows:
Offers of Proof Submitted.
First-That there has been failure of
registration as provided by the State Con-
stitution and through such failure over
10000 fraudulent votes for Hayes and
Wheeler had been cast.
Second-That in August, 1876, large
numbers of soldiers had been sent into
the State under General Ruger, who tele-
graphed that all was quiet, and no more
troops were needed and that if more
were needed he would call for them; that
notwithstanding this, on the next day
TOctober l7lH) the President issued his
proclamation, and large number of ad'
ditional troops were sent into the State;
that during 1876 there was no time when
the STATE authorities could not preserve
the pPdco.
Third-rhat troops were sent into the
State without the request of the Legsla-
ture, which could have readily been con-
vened.
Fourth-That troops were sent not to
quell insurrection and preserve peace,
but to overawe voters and influence the
election, and that they were presented
at the polls and did intimidate and in
fuenCe voters.
Fifth-That the presence of troops en-
boldened the more desperate of the neg.
roes, and that in Beaufort and Charles
ton they inaugurated a system of riot and
violence, in which they were protected
by the State officers; that the police of
Charleston, composed mainly of desperate
negroes, employed its time in shooting
down inof'ensive white citizens; that
negroes at the polls were armed, and pre-
vented colored men, who would have
voted the Democratic ticket, from doing
so; that the State militia, consisting of a
worse class of negroes, were at the polls
and assisted in preventing colored men
from voting the Democratic ticket; that
one of the electors, who was Sheriff of
Charleston county, [C. G. Bowen], ap-
pointed hundreds of deputies, who went
about arresting citizens at their pleasure,
unwarrantably interfering with elections
and that United States Marshals in large
numbers were at the polls interfering
with a free vote by the people Of the
State.
The Argument for the Hayes Electors.
Mr.. Lawrence began the argument for
the Hayes objections by showing that
want Of registrators did not affect the
election. The Constitution ofthe United
States gave power to the Legislature of a
State, and the Constitution of State
could put no restrictions upon this con
stitutional grant to a Legislature. He
went into a brief argument to show the
form of government in South Carolina
was Republican. That troops had been
stationed in the State without authority
of law was untrue. In fact, it must be
presumed that the officers of the Govern
ment understood and executed the laws.
In relation to the presence of United
States Marshals at the polls, the Consti-
tuition gives Congress power to enforce its
provisions; if evidence was to be admit
ted, there would be abundance of proof
to show the presence of these men was
necessary. 1t must be presumed as evil
dence ofproof to the contrary that the
officers had done their duty.
In reply to the fifth objection that
there had been no republican form of
government from January lst, 1876, to
December 10th, 1876, he cited authorities
to show that the history ofthe State must
be accepted as evidence of an established
republican form of government.
Mr.. Lawrence closed at 11:46, and SEN
ator Christiancy waived the right to be
heard as an objectoI.
Montgomery Blair'S Argument.
Montgomery Blair, for the Democrats,
said they would offer to prove that owing
to violence and the presence of United
States troops on the day of election, there
was no full and fair election by the
people. The first point on which he laid
stress was the absence ofany registration
of voters. He charged that this was an
open and palpable violation of the Con-
stitution, notoriously done to perpetuate
fraud. He next passed to the use of mi
litary in the State, which he said was
lust and sufficient ground to throw aside