The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1877-10-07
THE ELECTORAL FRAUD.
"A PIJNGENT REVIEW OF THE WHOLE
TRANSACTION BY ONE OF THE
"hEyEN"
An Infamy that sooner or Later Must be
Expunged from the Archives of
American History.

Expunged from the Archives of
American History.
Eons The speech Of Henry 3 Payne, of Ohio, q
Sdndushy, Sept ~, 1877.
As certain members OF the Electoral Commits
eion, AMI certain OF the distinguished couuse
who appeared before it, have freely criticised it
action and discussed the merits Of its decision,
10 not Inappropriate for me, on this first ri pear
ance OF mine before the people OF Ohio since m
return from Washington, TO relate my experience
and publish my views respecting that most re
markabje drama. learn too, that among Demo
Gratis there exists some Misrepresentation 81
to the motives and considerations which induced
the creation OF the Commission, and the hope
ID Il INDUCED that Brief narrativ.
from one who was present as witness and actol
from the conception to the final contamination
and who has no cause or inclination 10 conceal OF
withhold any fact or occurrence, will dispel all
doubts and suspicious as to tho fidelity aud cour.
age OF the Democratic members and Senators.
Let me recall he situation: The excitement OF
the election had been prolonged and was intense.
The House was Democratic. the senate Repub.
Lean. Each claimed that its candidate had been
elected, each thoroughly understood its own
position, its strong and It's weak points. Never
did it underestimate the tact and resources OF it's
opponents. The returns, single and duplicate,
were in the actual custody OF the president of the
Henate, aud he WAS ready to count or dispose OF
them at such lime and IN such manner ~ his
party friends in caucus might direct.
The twenty-second joint rule, under which
three presid ntial counts had been determined,
and which enabled either house, by it's dissept, to
reject the vote OF q State, had been abrogated on
the aart Of the Senate The Morton bill Of the
previous session, which substantially granted to
either hons o the same power, had been curiousIy,
but unintention4ly, suspended by q motion to re-
consider. The Edmunds proposition to submit
the contested cases to the supreme Court had
signally failed. There was mapifestly re-
L.skA III
gress must by law create tribunal for the trial
OF the contested cases or matters be left to work
themselves out. La the absence Of legislation
there was no doub. rs to what the acton of the
President OF the Senate would be, though many
Of his own party questioned and even denied
his right to count the oes. Yet, " no
other was provided, to avoid confusion
and anarchy the entire body Of Republicans, ex-
cepting, perhaps, three or four. would have JUST
fed and sustained the action Of the "Presient !"
He was unner no legal obligation to 20 to the
hall OF the House, whore the House would have
been protected in the demand OF it's equal riR hts:
but. first inviting the attendance of The House in
the Senate Chamber, he would, projected by its
police, have opened the returns, counted the
votes. and declared Hayes elected, and the House
would have been utterly helpless in the pre- m.ses
Ii could have returned TO i.s own hall, proceeded
20 vote by States, and elected Tilden, but this
would have been revolutionary and futile, mas
much as the contingency provided in the consti-
tuition for such act on had not occurred. The
creation OF u tribunal, therefore, for the
peaceful and orderly settlement Of the
controversy was the dictate Of duty and
patriotism, no less than Of sound policy
and political expediency. The proposition to
raise committee OF conference originated not
In the Senate but in the House, and with q Re-
publican member. Each committee matured its
plan and then submitted it to the joint meeting
That OF the House committee, drafted by Mr..
McCrary, the present Secretary OF War, and
approved, proposed tribunal, to
consist OF the five senior Associate Justices Of the
Supreme Court, and to submit to it without re-
serve oil the certificates, objections, and all the
papers and evidence in the possession OF the Sem
ate, or either OF the houses of Congress, with
power to take such additional testimony as they
snould deem necessary. should here explain
that the fve senior Associate Justices Of the Stu
prone Court consisted Of Clifford, Field Swayne,
Miller and Judge DAVIS. swayne and Miller were
Republicans, and Clifford and Field were DEM
Dcrats, and Judge Davis, as we
know, was Independent. The plan OF the Senate
was q tribunal to consist Of four JUS
chosen by each house, and one to be cast out by
lot, and the submission to it OF the papers and
testimony under severe restrictions. l need not
detail the long struggle between the committees
the agreement to ten members OF Congress,
equally divided between the houses and the two
parties, their inability to agree upon the fifth |
Justice, we Offering to accept Mr. Davis and they
1fering to take Swayne ana Miller aud give US
Clifford and Davis, Oar insisting upon Clifford and
Field, and their finally asserting to that, but on
,ondition that they might drop Swayne and take
Miller and Strong, the completion OF the bill, its |
report to and sdoption by both houses and the |
Of the Electoral Commission.
The Democratic members OF the two commit |
lees Aaeented to this measure with the full belief |
hat Judge Davis would be appointed the ff- |
'eenth member as umpire. He was the senior Of |
she remaining associates and was the only one |
qualified by freedom from the partisan bias,
which, together with his learning aud unsulied |
integrity, eminently fitted him for his place, and
yhen, In addition to all this, two OF the four |
associates designated were Democrats, it was |
10t strange that We were all confident that no |
Inc else than Judge DAVIS would in any event pe |
placed on the commission. and l feel warranted |
n affirming that had it been probable that Judge
Bradley, or either OF the other judges, would |
nave been appointed to q seat on that tribunal, |
he electoral bill would never have been reported
20 the two houses or enacted into law. The |
selection OF Judge Davis was anticipated and |
expected by both parties in Congress, and by the
,0untry at large. 1t is but justice to Messrs. |
Clifford and Field to make public the fact that at
he first meeting OF the four Justices they voted
or Judge Davis, and persisted in so doing, |
,hough Judge Strong assured them Davis would |
lot accept, and it was only at the meeting on the
Ollowing day, when Mr.. Strong presented |
written communication from Davis peremptorily |
ieclining the position, that they reluctantly |
f0ted for Judge Bradley.
THE DECLINATIoN OF JUDGE DAVIS.
Various reasons have been assigned for Judge |
)avisH declination OF this great public duty. |
senator Matthews attributes it to the interior |
snce OF Providence IN causing him, in the mean |
lime, 10 be elected TO the United States Senate. |
4 Is difficult to perceive how his election to an
,face, the term of which would not commence |
until the labors of the commission we're closed, |
,ould possibly conflict with his discharging his |
1uties as commissioner. Possibly the persistent |
opposition in the Senate, implying dlstruss or
ear OF his lmpartiahty, may have Influenced his |
1ecision. However that may be, his refusal to |
serve was the occasion Of profound dissppoint- |
nent and deep and bitter regret. While no man,
10 far as / know, is authorized to say what his |
insl opinion would have been, after hearing the |
,ases, yet the Democaatic party and the whole |
sountry would have accepted his decision as that |
II an upright, learned and fearless judge, and |
would have respected 1t accordingly.
THE FLORIDA CASE.