Clarksville weekly chronicle. (Clarksville, Tenn.) 1873-1890, 1877-02-10
WASHINGTON NEWS.
The Electoral Commission.

volume In the Congressional reports,
and we have not more than half a
column to give them, it is obvious there
fore that we can give only the merest
skeleton of what took place.
Oar last notice closed with the refer
ence of the case of Florida to the
Electoral Commission.
Feb. MIR. Field opened the ar
gument for the Objectionable gist of
his speech is best understood from one
sentence in it. THE usual form of
stating the question, Can you go be-
hind the certificate, is an erroneous
form; it should be reversed SO as to
read, Can the certificate go behind the
truth and conceal It," Arguing the
question on this basis his conclusion
is, Fraud vitiates all transactions"
Mr.. Tucker argued on the decision
of the Supreme Court of the State
and the quo qoarTanto" issued by it as
restraining the Board from the judici-
airy functions assumed by it.
Mr.. Kasson for the defense, argued
against the Intervention of Congress
in the action of State authorities, and
Mr.. McCrary discussed the quo loar-
rdntO.
Feb. 3.-The question of the recep-
ton of evidence had been sprung af-
ter Mr.. McCrary's speech of the day
before on which question,
Mr.. O'Conor urged that it should
be admitted subject to the question of
its relevancy.
Mr.. Evarts opposed the introduc-
ton of evidence on the ground that if
admitted at all it would be necessary
to go to the fundamental facts, for
which there was no time.
Mr.. Black argued that the evidence
was already before the Commission,
through the reports of the Congress
sional committees.
1t was then arranged that the ad-
mission of evidence should regularly
be argued by counsel.
Mr.. Merrick argued for the admis-
sion of evidence and contended that,
when the Constitution ordered the
votes to be counted, it imposed the
responsibility on Congress ofascertain-
ing what were votes.
Mr.. Black followed on the Demo-
cratic side, and Mr. Stanley Matthews
and f. w. Stoughton on the Repub-
lican side.
Mr.. Blacks speech On this head
was very strong, we give the abstract
of it forwarded by special telegraphic
dispatch to the Louisville Courier
journal
He insisted that evidence, being once in,
or offered, or filed in the case, was to be
treated as a court of equity treats evidence.
The Commission was not required to give
it any particular amount of force or of
weight in Its final judgement, but the Com
mission was to look at the case and all the
evidence before 1t. There had been much
talk here about going behind the action of
the State. He believed firmly in the sover-
eign power of a State to appoint any per-
son klector, pEoylded IL vas zone IN Gne
he believed that if the appointment was
made in that manner, no man had the right
to 90 behind IT and say it was not an APP
pointment fl 10 be made. Any body, Wheth-
er an officer of the State or an officer 81
the General Government who undertook 10
set aside such an appointment as that
would be guilty of usurpatiOn of authority,
and his act would DO utterly void. There
fore, if the Governor of Florida. in the case
= hNeaL Loot rr,c
made by the people, undertook to certify
they were not elected and TO put somebody
else in their place, that act was utterly void,
false and fraudulent. They were not going
behind the act of the State in this case
They were only going behind the fraudu-
lent act ofan officer of the State, whose act
had no validity whatever in IL. When
they were told that if the President of the
Senate laid before the two houses false
paper, paper that was absolutely counter
felt, that was the end of IL and that no eX-
traneous evidence could be produced for
the purpose of showing that the paper was
a forgery, the doctrine went too far. II
that proposition were carried out to its log
ical conclusions. then it would follow the
two houses OF Congress must simply re-
ceive what anybody choose to fabricate and
to lay before them, through the Presldent
ofthe Senate and that neither the President
of the Senate nor either of the houses, nor
both of them together, could do anything
in the matter but take just what was given
without inquiring into the genuineness of
it. The work of the cOunterfeiter was
well
mere spawn of a criminal conspiracy got
up for the purpose of cheating the people
of the State, and the people of the Union,
Overturning and Overthrowing the great
principle underlying the institutions ofthe
country. The man who undertook to say
that he certified to the election of these
men, while there glared upon him from
the record which lay before him evidence
that the fact was the other way, was
counterfeiter, and the paper issued by him
was fraudulent. If the paper was fraudu-
N a { law
rupt in morals as if ii was simple connt-
erfeit made by somebody else than by the
man who protested to sign Mr.. Black
cited what he called the evidence of the
fraud, the various proceedings to overturn
the Hayes and Wheeler electors, and adj
ded that the State was determined not to
be cheated of her vote, and had said that
she would ascertain the truth In some I'M
deniable form by proceedings, the correct
ness OF which could never be impeached.
She therefore had taken those usurpers by
the throat, had dragged them into the court
of justice, and there, in the presence OF
competent tribunal, she had implicated
them charged them with the offence,
brought other parties who were claimed TO
be her agents, and set them face 20 lace
The proofs had been given on both sides,
and there had been a solemn adjucation by
that court of competent jurisdiction that
the persons claimed to cast their votes lOf
Hayes and Wheeler had no right or au-
thority or power whatever to do that thing.
That decision was hnal.
Mr.. Black was followed by Mr..
Stoughton. He argued against the
quo rcaTraato; at least as an impedi-
ment to accepting the action of the
Hayes electors, which took place be-
fore its issuance, and therefore at
time when they were de factO officers of
the State.
Messrs. Evarts and Charles O'Conor
were to close the argument on Mon
day the 9Th.
Feb. 5.-The elimination of the
argument before the electoral COM
mission was considered to arrive on
this day when Mr.. Evarts and Mr..
O'Conor were to argue the question,
whether the Governors certificate is
final or whether the validity Of the
election of its returns and of the can
vass they underwent can be tested at
all stages of the transaction admitting
all evidence which can bear upon it.
The former of these two positions was
maintained by Mr.. Evsrts, the latter
by Mr.. O'Conor.
We would much wish to give brief
abstract of both these speeches, but it
is for two reasons impossible. The