Mexico weekly ledger., 1877-02-15

creature of the federalists of that
body. Mr.. Jefferson and his friends
made no secret of their purpose in
the event of such an act, of revo-
luton being attempted. They open
ly proclaimed their fixed resolution to
resist any attempt of this sort by
force, and it is a part of the history
of the country that the Governors of
two great states of the Union were
preparing to put the MALTA of their
states on a war footing. The con-
spirators of 1901 quailed before the
outraged Indignation of a free peo-
pie, and Mr.. Jefferson was elected
President by the House, notwith-
standing then, as now, this opposi-
ton to him and his party had control
of the Government in all it's depart
ments, Legislative, executive and jul
dicial.
MI. Speaker, | have never doubted
that, if the Democratic party had
pursued the same course with our an
cestors Of 1901, if they had treated
the pretension of the President of the
Senate to count the electoral vote and
declare who was clscted President as
a bold usurpation and an act OF revO-
luton that under no circumstances
would be submitted to. if the reso-
luton of the conventions Of the 9Th
OF january OF the great states Of Ohio.
Illinois aud l,,li,., l,l InAn f,tI>u,
ed up by the states of the East and
Northeast, this wicked and danger
Gus conspiracy of the men who have,
b. their misgovernncnt, peculations
and corruptions, brought disgrace
and defeat to their party would have
been abandoned and the will of the
people as agressed last November
carried out. But. sir, such seems
to have been the sentiment of those
whose duty it was to act in this mat
ter. 1t is Il mistake, however, to sup
pose that the ]pretension that the
President Of the Senate could alone
count the electoral vote is the only
difficulty to a peaceful and satiStac-
tory solution Of the difficulties sur
rounding the presidential succession.
That ''pretension'' being admitted.
all other difficulties vanish before
the. exercises OF this one-man power.
But consigning this pretension to the
grave Of forgotten ~foilies, as the the
provisions of this bill in fact do, there
are several disputed questions which
make their appearance, and must find
d solution. COnceding that the count
of the electoral vote is to he made by
the two Houses and that each House
has equal power 'and prerogative in
making it, the troublesome question
arises whether it requires "a concur-
rent vote Of both Houses to reject as
we'll As to affirm or count Il vote. At
no time in the history Of the Govern
meat has thiS question assumed In"
or the character it now
possesses. w have lad the votes
Of the states IN dispute. but We have
never lad such dispute. in q condi-
ton of things like the present, that
is, when the disputed votes We're de-
Of the result and when both
Houses Of Congress differed in their
political complexion. Up to this
the votes of disputed states were
not decisive Of the result or both
Houses were of the same political
faith. Hence it is that the question
as to the power of each House to
count or reject q vote must be dccid-
ed or the probabilities are that no re-
suit would be reached by both Houses
by the 4th of March.-And this is
neither a constitutional questiOn-one
that has been decided by uniform and
llnbroken precedent-or one about
which any fair-minded rejecting mind
AN have any reasonable doubt. 1t
is the rock on which the bill of 1900
was wrecked between the two Houses.
In the hill of 1924, passed in the
Senate under the leadership of Mr..
Van Buren,. and approved by Mr..
Webster, then Chairman Of the Judi
Committee Of the House, each
House must concur in the rejection
IF a vote, or it was entitled to be
counted. The twenty-second joint
'ule, adopted in 1865, rejected the
Iote of either House failed to APP
prove it. Amid the doubt and UNI
certainty on this mooted question, it
s absolutely essential that some
i9reement should be had' or we may
lrift into anarchy, an interregnum,
he usurpation ofthe President Of the
or something worse.
Thus situated, as we are, it seems
0 me that there can be no excuse for
negative on this bill, unless it is be-
ieved that the two Houses cannot
count the electoral vote under the
Constitution or there Is some other
aid constitutional objection to II.