The Manchester journal. [volume] (Manchester, Vt.) 1861-current, 1877-02-08
Tmn ELKrTonAL MI.

There seems to be disposition on
the part Of many Republicans in onr
State TO find fault with our Senators
for supporting the electoral bill, and
especially with Senator Edmunds who,
as chairman Of the Senate committee,
may be considered, in one sense, as its
author. Our representatives all voted
against it, and the question very natn
rally comes up which were right
We publish the following letter from
Mr. Edmunds to Hon. Daniel Roberts
and made public in the Free Press as
showing some OF the reasons why he
favored the bill. 1t may be well to
state, however. that up to the present
time, there has been no case Of con.
tested electoral votes which would
affect the general result, and no action
on the question which can be said to
settle il in favor Of either side.
WAsBISeToS, d. g., Jan. q, 1871.
DEAN Sm;--I have yours. Some
misapprehenson seems to exist as to
the history and present state of the
law and practice, the opening and dis.
posing Of the electoral votes. tn
order, correctly to Judge Of the propri-
ETY. Of the bill now pending on the
subject, it is necessary to know what
has taken place hitherto. 1t is this:
First-Down to 1917, no objection
TO. or dispute concerning, the vote Of a
State arose. Daring that time. the
President Of the Senate opened the
certificates OF votes, and they were
tabulAted by teilers. appointed by each
House. and handed up TO the President
of the Senate, who declared the result
Of The tabulaiion, and then, under the
order Of the Senate, sometimes he Ger.
tiled that he had opened the certf.
Gates and counted the votes, and the
result was that 80 and so bad been
elected, or that there had been no
election.
second-When the frat doubt OF
dispute arose, in lsl7,in respect TO the
vote of Indiana The Two Houses, as Of
right. determined what should be done,
without a hint, even. from anyone,
that the President Of the Senate had
any deciding power.
Thrd-When tie next doubt or dis
pute arose. 10 1921, as to the vote Of
/ Missouri, the two Houses did the
same thing, without any suggestion o.
\ power in the President Of the Senate.
/ Fourth When the next matter o.
dispute arose. 10 1881. as to the vote
Of Michigan. the same course was per
sued.
Fihb--When the question iose. ia
1 1887. as to the vote OF the ineligibl,
electors. the committees on the sub
ieci reported that the substantial ques
iion wac whether the electoral colleges
ID the several States should decide o.
whether Congress should. aud tia
this should be provided for by a per
maneni provision. There was not th'
suggestion from any source that ;h'
President Of the Senate could deter
mine anything.
I sixth When. 10 1857. a question
arose as TO The vote Of Wisconsin tb,
same thing happened The t~'
Houses discussed it. aud almost ever
speaker, II not every one, aad lhl
President 81 the Senate himself. declar
ed thAt be bad no deciding power
On thai subject Mr. CollAmer, u Yer
mont, said that question arising, TIL
chair should have immediately state,
the cond itiOu Of ihiags aud the tw'
Hoases should have separated % max
provision 10 relation 20 the manner o
settling il, Aad thai il should hAv'
! been provided for by law long ago