Alpena weekly argus. [volume] (Alpena, Mich.) 1871-1893, 1877-02-28
Seelye and Pierce.

AS rule the organs are silent
concerning the two Republican
members of the House whose
partisanship was not strong enough
to permit of their swallowing the
Louisiana infamy. The Post, of
course, is ready to revile them, but
Republican journals which have
any reputation to lose do not care
to risk it by detraction of men
whose standing in their party has
been as high as that of Congress
men Seelye and Pierce. The
grounds upon which these gentle
men based their opposition to the
decision of the commission in the
Louisiana case are so well worth
noting that we reproduce their
speeches. Mr.. Seelye spoke as
follows:
1t is perhaps generally true that
in discussions so earnest, not to
saw excited, as this, neither party
may be altogether right or alto
gether wrong. In the. bitterest
disputes each side may have some
what to justify it, both sides, per-
haps, being correct in what they
affirm, and only mistaken in what
they deny. suppose we should
never have any contention among
true-hearted men if each had a
clear understanding of the ground
occupied by the other. In this
case of the Louisiana elections it is
to me quite clear that the charges
which each party brings against
the other are ia the main true. Nc
facts were ever proved more con.
clusively than the frauds and cor
ruption charged upon the one
party, and intimidation and the
cruelty charged upon the other
Which party went the further and
did the worse in wrongdoing il
would be hard to say. The cor.
ruption on the one side seems as
heinous as the cruelty on the other
side is horrible, and the extent Of
either does not seem limited, except
as the necessities of the case did
not permit or the requirements o
the case did not call for more.
find it therefore impossible to de.
termine which Of the two sets Of
electors sending their certificates
from Louisiona voices the actua
will of the people of that State In
the late election, and it is equally
beyond my power to admit the
propriety of accepting either.
cannot exaggerate the reluctance
with which | differ from the wise
and candid men--wiser and more
candid men it would be hard tC
find who have pronounced the
Judgment Of the electoral commits
sion upon which we are now tC
vote. / acknowledge, l think
appreciate, the strength of Their
position. We cannot be too jealou,
of the constitutional right of Stat,
to choose its Presidential elector,
in such manner Gas the Legislature
thereof may direct" We canno
be too careful of Congressional in
reference, with the duly accredit
ed results Of such choice. Wheth
er we like or dislike it, the RICH
of State to choose its electors il
its own way, and to ascertain ant
certify thereto in such forms as /
may prescribe, is beyond our law
full control. ] admit all this as ,
technical statement OF clear prin
ciple Of our constitution, a principle
moreover, in its general applica
ton as wise as IL il clear. Blu
there are cases where the spsDiDuuB
jus becomes sunma injuria, case
where the law, strictly interpreted
and strenuously enforced, work
out result which contradicts al
law, and in snch cases equity lay
the letter OF the law aside and lift
ifs voice In Judgment as the sover
eign spirit Of the law. the spirit o