New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1877-02-13
IOUINIdNA.

isiana case, that the GOVtfnincnC Oh that olaIc
is invalid, that its returning board IS uncon-
| stitutiopaI, and, moreover, was illegally con-
| stitufed, and that it had no authority to can
yass the votes for electors Some examination
of these CLAIMS in the light of the decision OF
| the Electoral Commission on the Florida case,
will not he out of place. Before that Commits
| sion the claims of partisans count for nothing.
| That body can consider only the legally estab-
| lished facts These facts are: Cd The Gov
crnor of the State commissioned electors
certain persons who cast their votes for Hayes
and Wheeler. (2) The appointment by the
| Governor is not cOntradicted, and does not
| appear adverse to the finding by the board
| empowered by State law to ascertain the re-
suit of an election, nor is it challenged by any
| other branch of the State Government
1t is common for Democratic Journals which
| address themselves only to the prejudices of
| benighted partisans to assume that Gov. kel-
| lOgg never was recognized rs the Governor OF
Louisiana. But this is total mistake. AT a
very early day, and without just cause, as we
| believe, the President did most formally and
alphabetically recognize the Kellogg Govern
ment. One of the strongest charges against
him as yet made by political opponents, was
that he did assume to decide this question by
executive authority backed by the bayOnet.
As far as it was possible for the President to
establish the status of a claimant for the office
of Governor the President decided in favor
of Kellogg without hesitation. But this Is
not all. Every member of Congress from
Louisiana, who received a certificate at all,
holds his seat by certificate from this same
Kellogg as Governor. The validity of his
claim to that Office has been in many ways
recognized by both houses of Congress. More
over, it was an essential part of the Wheeler
compromise, which was adopted largely by
Democratic votes, that the Kellogg Government
should be recognized and undisputed until the
expiration of its term. To this agreement
majority of the members OF both parties, In
both houses of the Louisiana Legislature, at
fixed their names, declaring, "We hereby
scyeraly agree to sustain by our influence
" and votes the Joint resolution hereinafter set
"forth." And this resolution, adopted April
IA, 1875, by vote of 80 TO IL in the House,
and overwhelmingly in the Senate, declares
that the General Assembly of Louisiana ''will
"not disturb the present State Government,
Claiming to have been elected in 1872,
"known as the Kellogg Government, or seek
TO impeach the Governor for any past official
"actse and that henceiorth we will accord to
"said Governor all necessary and legitimate
Support in maintaining the laws and add
"vancng the peace and prosperity of the peo-
"ple OF the State" Accordingly Gov. Kellogg
was recognized, in every possible official mode,
as Governor of Louisiana, by both parties,
both houses of the Assembly, both houses of
Congress- and the Executive, from that time
forward Under these circumstances, his GER
tfcate, given before his term expired, has
precisely as much validity and force as that of
any other Governor in the United States.
This being indisputabe, by whom is that
certificate contradictedf Not by the Return
ing Board. Not by the State officers, who, ac-
cording to Democratic theories, ought to have
canvassed the vote. Not 10y the Legislature
or either branch of it. Not by any court III
the State, from the highest to the lowest.
Not in any form, nor by any channel what
ever. has The State of Louisiana attempted to
dispute the rightfulness of the appointment of
electors Now the Commission has declared
that it is not competent to go behind a Gov
errors certificate, when that certificate is not
contradcted by tho body legally empowered
to canvass the votes. There is the end OF the
case.
Of what avail, then, for the purposes of
this Commission are the evidences in re-
gard to the misconduct of Wells and his
associates Suppose, for the moment that
they had no power to canvass the votes at
all it does not follow that the Governors
certificates are invalid, for they are not ques-
toned by anybody who did have power to
canvass Or suppose that the board acted
illegally in failing to fill "a vacancy; that does
not invalidate certificates which stand unless
challenged 10y competent board. Or suppose
that il acted cOrruptly, and tried to sell out
the vote of the State; that creates no preslmp-
ton whatever that the action of the Governor
was unlawful or unjust The Board may have
tried in vain to sell itself, and, failing, may
have decided according to law at the end. All
the mountain of evidence, be it strong weak,
false or true, which has been piled up against
this Board, goes for nothing under the ruling
of the Commission and the nature of its
organization. For the law presumes that
the Governor would have refused his GER
tifcate in aid of false, fraudulent, or cor
rupt decision. If he had commissioned one set
of men, and the Board had declared another
set elected, evidence as to the conduct, char
| acter, and legality of the Board would help to
| show whether it's finding or his certificate
should prevail. But his certificate is officially
undisputed and unchallengcd, and there is
therefore no occasion or excuse for inquiry
into the performances of the Board.
The Democrats were right, in saying that
they had much stronger case in Florida than
elsewhere. There they had a court, a new
canvassing board. a new Legislature, and q
| new Governor disputinQ the validity of the