The Rutland daily globe. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1873-1877, 1877-02-07
THE APPOINTMENT OF ELECTORS IN
VERMONT

We referred, some weeks ago, to the
fact that in the presidential election OF
1876, the result of the vote in the electoral
college was seventy-one for John Adams
and sixty-eight for Thomas Jefferson,
electing the former president and the latter
vice president; but that an objection was
made or suggested to the four votes of
Vermont, which, if it had been sustained,
would have reversed the result, electing
MIR. Jefferson president by one majority
unless, indeed, it had been determined that
"majority of the whole number of cleo
tors appointed meant majority of all
the electors that could be appointed. Ex-
actly what the objection was cannot, per-
haps, be stated, and, indeed, the fact that
an objection had been suggested would,
probably, be unknown but for letter from
James Madison to Thomas Jefferson, dat
ed December 81, 1896, wherein he writes:
UNLESS the Vermont election of which
81 little has of late been said, should con-
&C tain fatal vice in 1t, Mr.. Adams may
be considered as the president elect"
Senator Roscoe Conkling, in his great
speech on the electoral bill, referred to this
letter of James Madison, and commented
as follows: "What was the vice, or al
legged vice, in the vote of Vermont? The
state of Vermont was then living under
constitution wanting in provision for
the choice Of the electors. No statute
had been passed directing the mode in
which electors should be appointed, and
the constitution of the United States Or
dained that they should be appointed by
the states in the mode directed by their
legislatures. The legislature of Vermont,
in the absence of statute, proceeded it.
self to appoint electors"
Before referring to Senator Conkling's
statement we may say that the inference
to be drawn from Madison's letter is that
the power existed somewhere, or that con-
gress could confer the power on some tri-
bunal, to 60 behind the certificates and re-
turns, and inquire whether the electors had
been duly and legally appointed. Other.
wise, why should there be any uncertainty
about the election? The vote of the cleo.
toral college showed that John Adams had
received the highest number of votes being,
also, ga majority of the whole number OF
" electors appointed" and that the foul
votes of Vermont were properly certified
to, how then could there be any uncertain
ty about the election, If the certificate and
returns were final, conclusive, and could
not be impeached or questioned2 Other,
wise, what difference did it make with Mr.
Adams election whether the Vermont
votes were valid or invalid, or whether OF
not they contained "some fatal vice ?" In.
deed, it was to show that this power exist.
ed or, under the constitution, could be con.
ferred by congress upon some tribunal that
Senator Conkling referred to this letter Of
Madison and the supposed case of Yer.
mont.
But we do not propose to consider this
question. Senator Conkling, however, was
mistaken in his statement of fact. 1t /.
true that "the state of Vermont was then
" living under constitution wanting In
provision for the choice of electors; but
80 it Is to-day, and so, in fact, is nearly
every other state in the Union. With the
choice of electors, or the manner of their
appointment state constitutions have moth.
ing to do. 1t 10 left by the constitution OF
the United States solely to the direction Of
the legislature. 1t is not true, however
that "no statute had been passed directing