Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1877-02-22
The Electoral Commission.

lernoou, Senator Mitchell aud Mr.. Lawrence
opeued the argument Oh the radical side, the
former concluding bis speech as follows:
Mr.. President and gentlemen Of the Com.
mission: | submit this case upon the papers
before you. Were authorized to evoke your
Judgment upon facts aunde the record then
would | feel justified in attracting your at
tention to acts of intrigue, corruption and fraud
10 connection with the Oregon electoral vote,
that will stand forever in history az the crown
ing ln!amy of IN unrestraincd and insane per
so ial and political ambition, while the charge
of perjury and FRAUD against the returning
boards OF Louisiana and Florida by diSappoint.
ed aud maddcocd partisans echoed throughout
the land. might, were 1t proper, point you 10
q conspiracy that had its origin at ID Creamery
Park, New FORK city, at the home and by the
friends Of Samuel j. Tildeu. the democratic
candidate for President, that had for its pur
nose the purchase of an electoral vote upon the
faith of which title to the chief magistracy OF
the nation might be established. Though the
law Of your creation may not authorize you to
look into or consider this record Of intri que,
corruption aud fraud. it will stand neverthe-
less as part Of the history of the times,
changeless and palsied plague spot on the re-
cord of the democratic party that time cannot
obscure nor repentance condone.
The commission unanimously agreed to mo.
ton made by Mr.. jerks iu behalf Of the OBJ
iectors to the Watts vote that Watts and Sen
ator Mitchell should he summoned as wit
uesses. An order was also directed TO be
issued to Postmaster General Tyner requiring
him to produce copy OF the resignation OF
Watts and of the commission OF his successor.
After recess the commission reassemb;cd IN
the Senate chamber. Judge Hoadey and Nr.
Merrick appeared for the democratic, and MIR.
Evarts and Judge Stanley Matthews for the
republican directors.
Judge Hoadley said, our first proposition, Is
whether on the admitted facts OF the case the
questions are not already solved by the decs::
ions Of the Commission in the Florida and
Louisiana cases. We contend that the pruci-
ples controlling this case have been already an.
nounced in these cases. Only such documents
and papers as if offered aliunde would be com.
petent to be received may be considered when
found within the envelope sent to the President
Of the Senate, and the decision Of the returning
board acted upon by the Governor OF the State
is final and conclusive.
10 support cf this view the speaker quoted
from the speech of Mr.. Morton to the effect
that tho action of the State officers was the
action of the State. My proposition is that the
State of Oregon through her State officers has
spoken, and the result Of that speech is here in
the certificates given to Cronin, Odel and Cart
wright. They are the only legitimate, lawful
evidence Of the act Of Oregon in this matter
Who were the electors ascertained to he APP
pointed by the fua decision and determination
of the Board Of State Canvassers? Who we're
the returning officers according TO whose de.
Termination the Governor acted or failed to act
10 the issue o. the certificates oil the State OF
Oregon2
The speaker then proceeded to compare the
statutes of Oregon with the statutes OF Florida
and Louisiana, and applied 10 the Oregon case
the decisions made by the Com mission IN Flor
ida and Louisiana. He coutended the Governor
was rot there as a mere idle ceremony.
He was there to do what was required Of him
to do--to witness the canvass and to declare its
result. The Secretary of State is to canvass.
No duty was imposed on him to declare any re-
suit whatever but only to tabulate and foru,u
late, but not determine the result The vote
is to be given, received, returned aud canvassea,
as 10 the case OF the election Of il member OF
Congrcsa The Secretary Of State is required
to prepare two lists Of the naUes of the Electors
elected and athS the seal Of the State to the
same; two lists not three; the Secretary of State
not the Governor.
1t is not under the act Of Congress chat this
Is required The act Of Congress calls for &
certificate, which may be withouta real or with
cut the attestation Of the secretary. The act
of Congress says it shall be the duty Of the exc
cutive of each State to cause three lists to be
made and certified, Ec. My learned friend
has said that tho Secretary OF State signed the
certificate az a witness, but We claim that he
signed it as an attestation Of the fact Il IL the
act of the Governor and the &C. Of tho Sccrc.
tary ia the ordinary form, and being such it is
compliance with the siztioth section Of the
statutes of Oregon, and also with No. l2G Of
the revised statutes Of the United States, ard Is
the final aud conclusive decision aod drterml-
nation of the vote Of the State Of Oregon sc.
cording to the ouIy evidence provided by law
by which this tribunal can communicate: With
the State of Oregon.
These points Judge Hoadley elaborated At
considerable length referring TO suodry
authorities showing that where man ho!da
certificate or commission which may be ordI
nary evidence of title, and enters on the posses,
sion of the Office. he is an officer dc tac!o. The
office is filled, aud there can be 90 other officer
dc facto. His title can be impeacheh only iu
dcially by writ Of quo warranto, and in the
absence of such proceeding his title is perfect
QpalDSC all NUTIu. w uEIc Is TIC tiuO WuI-
ranto against Cronin Where is the proceed
ing of contest? Here comes Cronin with the
certificates of election, signed by the Governor
and Secretary, and no judicial tribunal to i'm
peach him. Is this tribunal judicial tribunal?
If it had been the frauds that We offered to
prove to your honors in the cases of Louisiana
and Florida would have been heard iDvcstigat
ed and redressed.
No; this is legislative body or 4 part OF
legislative body without power to exercise any
judicial function whatever. You cannot try
upon quo warranto or certiorarI; the judicial
power of the United States has been confded
to the judges of the Supreme Courts and the
inferior courts Of the country. This is not the
Supreme Court nor any other court in which
such questions can be decided.
Counsel then presented Two propositions, one
that the papers enclosed with the certificate
numbers one are Of 10 value as evidence by be
iug in that certificate, nor otherwise unless
they arc shown to be duly authenticated in con-
formity with the laws of OREGON