The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1877-01-25
sherman Opposes the Electoral Bill.

Sherman Opposes the Electoral Bill.
Consideration was then resumed Of the
unfinished business. The bill in regard
to counting the electoral vote was discuss
ed, and Mr. Sherman spoke in opposition
to it. He said that when select COM
mittee was appointed to consider this
subject, he expected as matter of course
to be able to vote for the bill reported by
the Committee, because he entertained
the highest respect for the members of
the Committee. 1t was painful for him
to dissent from the views Of men whom
he esteemed SO highly, but after brief
examination he had given the measure,
he thought it was his duty to oppose it.
This bill was to make court decide a
case already made up, and there was
provisions in it Incompatible with the
Constitution. Such law as this was an
evil example, and it could not be sustain
ed under the Constitution
Mr.. Sherman than spoke on the pow
ers and duties of the Commission author
lied BY the bill and asked if 1t was to
take returns as certifedby State officers
If so, everybody knew who would be
President; but if this Commission was to
be allowed to 20 back Of the returns, God
only knows what the result would be. 1t
would depend entirely upon the lot, the
chance which selected the fifth Judge OF
the Supreme Court who would be the
fifteenth member of the Commission f?
Mr.. Thurman said this bill sent to the
Commission all questions of law, as well
as of fact, and how the Commission will
decide no one could tell. ~" l.'' .."'
Mr.. Sherman-N No sir; that depends up
on the chance. 7Nt' ,'.N
Continuing his argument he said This
bill substitutes chance for the vote of the
electors, given according to law. 1t Sc
lected a, College of Cardinals secret con-
clave to elect President. Why not
count the electoral vote just as it has been
counted twenty-five " times during the
history of the Government?
Senator COnkling's Speech. ..-.,
Mr.. Conkling said, before reaching the
details of this measure, of its advantages
or merits, the Senate must make sure of
its power in some mode, to subject the
matter to the action of the two houses of
Congress or to the law making power Of
the government. A study of this matter
wears ago convinced him Of the right, and
therefore the duty of Congress to ascer-
tain and verify the electoral votes and
declare the true result of Presidential
elections, or else by an assertion of the
law making power to declare how these
acts should be done. His present judg-
ment did not rest on preconceived opin-
ions. Some weeks age, he reviewed care
fully and cautiously every act and pro-
ceeding. in our history bearing upon this
question and without the aid ofcompli-
cations made since then, he had examin-
ed every utterance in the books. A dis
tinction might be drawn between the
power of the Senate and the House OF
Representatives to act in conducting the
electoral count, but it was not his pur1
pose at the moment to explore that dis
tinction, not to inquire how far or wheth-
er at all the law indicated the exact form
in which the Constitution should be exc
cuted.
Mr.. Conkling then spoke Of his objec-
tions, and said if it was true that the
right to count the vote was by the Con
stitution imposed upon the President of
the Senate, the bill now upon the table,
nor any bill, rule or plan, would be of the
slightest efficacy OF effect If the Con-
stitution deposited in the President ofthe
Senate the power to count the electoral
vote, there was an end Of it and any act
or rule to strip him of that power would
be a bold intrusion upon the COnstitu-
ton. Ifsuch was the power of the Pres
dent of the Senate, then every proceed
ing had heretofore by the two Houses of