The Eaton Democrat. (Eaton, Ohio) 1875-1903, 1877-01-04
WHOLE NUMBER sos.

Presidential election, and saying who shall
be President. 1 protest against any such
power
The Presiding O6icer-The Presiding
Officer is utterly unaware that he has as
sumed the exercise of any such power.
During the debate Senator Cass said !:
The only thing which remains forus to do,
it there are insupeyable difficulties in the
spective halls. Then let the Senate or the
House of Representatives bring up the mat.
ter for action.
And Stephen A. Douglas said in the
same discussion
| rise to state that in my opinion, the
tellers have no right to authenticate that
certificate until the two Houses have passed
upon it as to its being a true count. rise to
protest against this joint Convention being
dissolved until the question which has been
raised shall have been decided.
This opinion goes to point that prior
to the adoption of the Twenty-second
Joint Rule all questions arising pending
the counting of the Electoral votes
should be decided in the Joint Conven-
ton of the two Houses. The language
of Mr.. Mason, President of the Senate,
was repeatedly emphatic to the point
that he had no authority to determine
upon the validity of the Electoral votes.
"The vote he said, in one instance,
"will be again read to the two Houses,
and they can determine 1Ohat shall be done"
He says again: "The presiding officer
did not undertake to decide achether the vote
of Wisconsin aoas a good or bad vote."
That was "a duty that he did not assume" !"
The presiding officer said: "He dis
claims having assumed on himself any
authority to determine whether that
vote, or any other vote, was good or a
bad vote"
This view of Mr.. Mason has been in
dorsed by Senators Hunter, Butler, Mon
roe, Toombs, Adams, Reid, Seward, Tou-
cey, Houston, Bell, Crittenden, Weller,
Cass, Douglas, and others. Even
Senator Morton said last winter, in sup
port of his bill to supplant the Twenty
second Joint Rule:
The effect of this section is to determine
which set (of Electoral returns) is to be
counted, and if the two Houses do not
agree, neither set is to be counted. And
again: The vote goes out; the State has no
vote because unless there is some tribunal
TO settle which vote shall be counted you
can not count both, and therefore you
can not count either. You must have
some tribunal to settle that difficulty,
and what tribunal is safer than the two
Houses of Congress? And again: 1 do not
accept the suggestion that the Vice-Presi-
dent of the United States has anything more
to do in the business of counting the votes
for President and Vice-President than that
specific duty which is prescribed for and
'enjoined upon him by the Constitution.
That duty is in the presence of the Senate
and House of Representatives to open the
certificates. There being no other duty as
signed to him, infer naturally that he is to
do nothing more. . There can be
under the Constitution no tribunal to de-
eide on that (two sets of returns) or any
other question arising in the course of
counting the votes. The duty is imposed
upon the two Houses of Congress. They
alone can perform it.
Mr.. Morton said that if Congress could
not determine, under his proposed bill,
the correct vote of State, it would be
the misfortune of that State If the vote
were lost. Senators Sherman and Ere
linghuysen and Christiancy, and others,
committed themselves unequivocally to
the doctrine that Congress had control
of the Electoral votes. No other doc
trine is tenable.