New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1877-02-05
Mr.. o'CONOR's STATEMENT.
WHAT PROOF MAY BIZ OFFERED.

Mr. O'Conor then began his statement in be-
half ofthe directors Certificate No from the state OF
Florida he said that be had prepared himself 10 lay the
facts OF the case before the commission condensed
FORM He said that his conception Of the proper course
Of proceeding was all need;ul evidence should come
into the statement, subject 20 objections 70 ts compe-
tency and effect. different might be taken be-
fore this tribunal Of judicial experts in regard the in
PRODUCTION Of evidence than generally taken in court
OF law where ignorant jury is apt to be msled by
hearing something which is not TO be taken into ju-
mcnt in the na consideration OF the Mr. OCOnOr
then read the paper he had prepared as follows:
First. On Dec. . 1876, being the regular law day.
both the riden and Hayes electors respectively met
and cast their votes, and transmitted The 70 the
seat ~ government livery FORM presclDei py 'he Con-
,uLuon, by any law bearing on the subject, was
equally COUPLED with by each OF the rival electoral
colleges. uncss there De difference between ,nem n
TINS The certified lists provided for IN section No lo6
OF the Revised Statutes we're as TO the Idcn electors
certified by the AttorneY -6ener ana were as 10 the
Hayes electors certified by Mr.. searns then Governor
All this appears record. and no additional evidence -
needed 20 interpret any part OF II Perhaps convey no
new Light By saying that but say IT FOR the purpose OF
presenting distinct view OF the case.
Second: \ qfO icdTTdHtO was commenced against the
Hayes the proper court OF Florida said
SIN day Of December 1876, before they had their
votes, which eyentuated IN judgment against then ON
the 18th OF January, 1877, which also determined ttt
the T!lden electors duly appointed The validity
and effect Oh this Judgment Is GeteIlnaDe VI tIe record
evidence De desirable ctler
IL be thought, first that the Tden electors should
give some supplemental PROOF OF me Pccs' Ie at INC
writ OF quO rGyrdEit0 served before the Hayes
cded other side u show the tendency o. az
peal from the judgment OF the GttO tcrdtO With those
two possible ana very slight exceptions the Whole
on this branch depends upon the record.
ThiJd: To show what is The common law Of Florida,
and also the true construction OF the Florida statutes
The Iden electors desire 70 place before the Commission
the record OF the Judgment OF the supreme Court IN That
state mandamus prosecuted on the relation " Mr.
Drew present Governor OF that state, force OF
which Mr.. stearns was busted ami Mr. Drew was adj
mitted Governor This Judgment, together With tho
Judges opinion are matters OF recO aud they require
other proof is there any technical rule 10 the
manner which this Commission may inform Itself
corning the laws OF Florida II may be permitted 20
utsriect IL will be that am endeay0rng 20 show
how very little there Is IN the shape OF PROOF.
Fourth The legislation OF Florida subsequently, 20 Dec
6, 1876, authorizing new canvass OF the electoral
vote and the Of such new canvass and the formal
transmission hercOftO the seat OF governing NJ IN perfect
conformity the Constitution ana law, except tnat they
subsequent IN point % ,ilc 10 Dec o. 1876 are all
record and already regularly before the Com
mission - -
lay before the by evidence actually
extrinsic viii now be stated: First the Board state
Canyassers acting on certain erroneous views While
making their canvass, by which the Hayes electors APP
peared be chosen rejected wholly the returns from
the County OF Manatee and parts OF the returns from
each OF the following counties Hamilton, Jackson,
and Monroe. | trust have omitted none In ~ doing
the SAID state Board acted without Jurisdiction As the
Circuit supreme Court OF Florida decided Ii Was
by Overrung and setting aside as not warranted by law,
these reflections that tile courts OF FLORIDA reached their
ernOr that the Hayes electors were usurpe and that
Tden electors were duly chosen. No evidence ha,
IN any view could be called extrnsc Is believed 10 10
neediul order establish the conclusion relied upon
by the Iden electors except duly authenticated cOes
OF the State canvass-tnat s the erroneous canvass
consider IT, aud OF the returns from the aD0yeaned Tour
countes-One wholly and the others ~ par-Tejected by
said state canvass; and secondly, evidence that Mr.
Humphres, hayes electO held oniee under Tho United
states.
porting the Hayes electors and the opening argument
offered In their behalf, the supporters OF the Ien cleo
tors led 10 believe that evidence - needed IN
Dc offered b. Inc supporters VI the Hayes cleo