New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1877-02-17
more. Mr.. Hewitt thinks that the count will be
completed next week.
THE ARGUMENTS.

OPINION EMPHATIC.
[BY TELEGRAPH To THE TRIBUNE.l
WASHINGTON, Feb. 16.-As soon a. the Commis-
sion had looked the doors at 10 o'clock this morning
debate Oh the Louisiana case began and lasted con-
tinuOusly until o'clock in the afternoon, when
was the hour agreed upon yesterday for vote on
the preliminary question of evidence Senator Nor
ton spoke first and was followed by Thurman, Gar
field, Bayard, Edmunds, Hunton, and Hoar in the
order named.
The main argument on the Democratic side was
made by Judge Thurman, whose chief point was
that the Election law Of 1872 repealed the law OF
1868 and that therefore no provision exists under
which vacancies occurring in the Electoral College
can be filled and even il that provision is not re-
pealcd, it only gives power to fill vacancies in the
places of electors chosen in November. He NAM
tanned that the two disqualified candidates were not
chosen His theory was that votes given Tor an III
eligible candidate thrown away. NO new
points were made by any of the Democratic MEN,
bers that had not been made by the counsel IN the
public discussion.
BY the time Representative Hoar had finished it
was after o'clock, and Judge Bradley had not yet
spoken. All the interest conferred upon him. Every
one recognized that he held in his hand the whoie
power of making the President, and that upon the
words he was to speak depended the settlement OF
the great controversy.
Judge Bradley spoke for about ten minutes, and
then read for half an hour from manuscript he had
prepared last night He said that in regard to the
question of eligibility he had qualified somewhat MS
first opinions When the Florida was argued he
had not fully examined the question, and not having
entirely made mp his mind as to the effect OF dis
qualification of an elector at the date of the election
he thought t well that testimony should be taken In
order that the facts be fully established and
further arguments il necessary might DC
made In considering the question since ne
had come to the conclusion that the clause in the
Constitution providing that no man shall be ap-
pointed an elector who is United States officer as
only varying form of the statement OF the require
ment prescribing qualifications for Senators or
Representatives In tire latter case the Constitu-
ton states that shall be Senator &c. but IL
has always been held that if disqualified at the time
of his election he cannot be excluded II he becomes
qualified when he presents himself to take his seat.
Judge Bradley therefore concluded that II an eector
was eligible at the time the electoral college met
his vote would meet all the demands of the Constl-
tuition. In the case Of the two Louisiana electors
Leyisee and Brewster, he SAID there was no alega-
ton that they were not qualified at the time they
were chosen to fill the vacancies caused by absence.
Therefore there was 10 necessity of taking evidence
to prove what was immaterial If proved. AS
to the electors alleged to be disqualified by
the State Constitution for holding state
Offices Judge Bradley maintained that State could
not impose causes of disqualification in addition to
those prescribed by the Federal Constitution, and
that it was manifesy contrary to proper interpre-
tation of the Constitution to hold that the United
States was to be deprived of the services OF eminent
citizens of a State solely because the State had
recognized their ability by selecting them to fill her
own offices.
The position taken by Judge Bradley, and by the
other Republicans in respect to alleged differences
between the Florida case and the Louisiana case,
growing out of the allegations of fraud and forgery
in the latter, was that there were no substantial
differences in the cases as presented to the Tribunal
In each the certificate of the Governor was regular
in FORM aud based upon the authoritative declara-
ton of the Canvassing Board. An attempt made by
the Democrats to argue that there was no evidence
and that the certificate of the Governor was based
upon the decision of the Returning Board, was met
by reference to the certificate of the Secretary OF
State accompanying the returns That officer cert-
tes that the Governors certificate is In accordance
with the report of the Returning Board on file IN his
office. The Democrats maintained that the returns
themselves should have been produced before the
Commission but TO this the Republicans replied
that the Commission was bound to accept the GER
ticao of the Secretary of State as true III the alb
sence of any testimony inside the papers themselves
to the contrary.
Perfect courtesy was observed in the manner OF
the commissioners toward each other during the de-
bate and it is stated that this has been the case
during the whole of the secret sessions of the
Tribunal. 1t was natural that strong emotions
should be felt as the controversy neared Its climax,
but these emotions found no vent in either words
ifnIa nd N
leaving the room tonight one of the Democratic
members said: 1T was hard work to restrain our
people in the House on the Florida case and do
not believe we can hold them back now" This
statement was believed by those who heard it to be
only thoughtless expression, called out by the Bit
ter disappointment felt by the speaker in common
with all the Democrats. In quite another spirit was
the remark of another Democratic commissioner,
who said that his Indignation at the Oregon affair
almost made him forget his disappointment at the
decision of the tribunal.