, 1877-02-08

h-.-..AAaA.--
ELEcT1N0 A PaEs1pENT.
Jadgo Joua 4. JAMESON, OF tho Superior
Court, in his letter published In The TnIn-
uxE this morning, wlli'o concediug tho pol
icy Of creating tho Arbitration Commission
Under tho special circumstances for this spe-
cia1 case, very properly shows that such plan
for determining Presidential elections will
never 10 for n permanoncy. Tho law, how
ever, does not aim to cstablish permanent
arbitration for tho determination Of such
questions it ends with It's notion in this
ease. Wo agreo with Judge JAMESON TINT
this plan conld not DO repeated with success.
Judge JAMESON holds that tho Constitution
does not authorize the President Of tho Soil
ate, or Congress, Or either House Of Congress,
to count thu vote the Constitution fails to
specify by whom tho yoto shall bo counted
nevertheless, Congress- las the power by
legislation to regulato tho count. Obvionsly,
tito Government OF the United Statos must,
BY somo ono of its officers or departments,
count tho voso for President, aud, by anal-
ogy, it Is for Congress 10 nano tho officer or
department to perform TINT duty. Under
this power Congress might impose tho duty
Of counting tho Presidential vote upon the
President, or upon tho Supreme Court, or
upon either House Of Congress. The i'm
policy Of such procoediug Is, however,
prohibition Of tho ndoption Of any such plan.
The CHIN, made Ia by Judge JAMESON tint
tho balance established by tho Constitu.
tion between tho States md tho Generai Gov
ernn,ont, in tho ,nattcr Of appointing Elect
orB md electing n President, Should 10 pro-
served. These Electors sustain mixol char
actcr,-tlrst, asState functionarics, In respect
TO ttoso appointed; aud SECOND, as FeIesM
functionarica, in respect to their duty Of
clccling President Therefore lo holds
That in all TINT relates to their election they
SHOULD lie subject to state authority, and In MI
tl,at pertains to their voting 10 tho national
authority. The laws Of tho State should 30
provide for nil this that there would DO
nothing for Congress to do but 10 provide
| fur tho counting. Looking, therefore, to
sou!o arrangement for tho future, Ito argues: !:
l. Tint, il tho Electoral Colleges ara to DO
retained, tho Constitution should DO amenl-
ed, requiring tho States by law TO confer
npon their courts of Inst resort tho power to
judicially determine all contests respecting
the Electors, aud q certificate Of such adju-
dicatlon should accompany tho returns Of
Electors and 10 final. Or,
2. 70 amend the Constitution 80 a. to pro.
yilo for n general aasemb!age OF all The
Electara at somo ono poiut, tlero to organize
and tho l'oly 10 empowered to Judge Of the
elections anil the qualifications Of It's own
members; tlia body to determine MI: con-
testod clections, nn.l then TO voto for Prcsi.
dent md icc.prosidsnt.
We will not discuss these suggestions; they
both rest upon tue assumption Of retaining
Tho machinery Of tho Electoral College, which
machinery Is At present tho source Of ull tllt
trouble In regard to sheso contested cascs
and which promises to bo OF still more
rouh1o In tho future. The remedy Is t
abolish tho Electoral College and yet pro
servo tho autonomy Of tho States. b1r. Ducg
AlEw l,a1 suggested thu plan! which, Will
working u rMlieal chauga in tho system q
clcctiuy tho President, does the least yio
lenco to tho existing righta and privileges 0
tho Statos.
Tho Constitution provides that tho IIous
OF Representatives "shall DO composed 0
members chosen oyory second year by th
people Of tho several states." 1n due cours
Of time, after haif century Of experience
It was found advisable to require that thes
Representatives should bo elected In singl
districts, and not upon ono ticket by tho ma
jority OF tho whole yoto Of staso.
, lseaidential Electors aEo now appolntc'
l ~. A