Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1877-02-28
Mr.. Hoar Defends Himself.

mfr Hewitt having charged Representative Hoar
with having rs a member of the Electoral Com
mission violated his previous pledges in relation
TO the admssbility OF evidence, he defends him.
self as follows
do not propose to debate the question of
the right of Congress to pass upon the cleo
ton, quail fications and returns of Presiden-
tial electors, a right expressly conferred in
regard to Presidential electors by techni.
cality, as it is one of the gravest questions
of constitutional power. do not propose
to debate the question whether the alleged
usurpation of power by the returning board
of louisiana counteracting what they claim
were greater crimes, should properly be en-
countered by greater usurpation of power
on the part of Congress. do not mean to
debate whether this opinion of one of the
most distinguished leaders of the democracy
(Senator Bayard), a member of the Com
mission, uttered within two years in his
place elsewhere, is correct: "Nowhere is
power given to either house of Congress to
pass upon the election, either the manner or
the fact of election, for President and Vice
President and if Congress or either house
should assume, under the guise or pretext
of counting the vote, to decide the fact of
the electors, it will have taken upon itself
an authority for which |, for one, can find
no warrant in the charter of our liberty"
Nor do | mean to discuss the question
whether that gentleman and his colleague
(Senator Thurman), who have changed their
opinions, honestly, have no doubt, are more
liable to changes of partisanship than we
who had no cause to do so. ! propose to adj
dress myself directly to the charge made by
the gentleman from New York (Mr. Ilewitt).
| spent three days in that genteman's pres
,,.N. lnpl hat
this question of going behind these returns
should be submitted to the tribunal as q
question about which he and differed.
The very last act of the committee on con
ference was this: One of the members
said al am afraid that you will leave
it open 10 somebody to claim that this
bill requires us to go into that question,
instead of submitting that question to the
tribunal" Every member of the committee
assured that gentleman that it was not so,
that they perfectly understood it; and when
they got through, the gentleman from New
York, who was sitting within four feet of me,
rose and said "Now there is question on
which we are all agreed. We agree that one
side is to contend one way. and the other side
is to contend the other way, and that the
Commission is to decide on that question.
If any gentleman here can suggest clearer
language than we have got in this bill, let
him rise and make the suggestion" And
nobody did it. This bill went to another
place, and there the honorable Senator from
Ohio-Mr. Thurman-a distinguished, hon.
ored and honorable man, rose i'll his place to
persuade Republican Senate to accept the
the bill They differed with their Republi-
can associates in this House, and he said to
them "lere are certain questions concern
Il. -
to enumerate them. The fourth was that it
is competent to go behind the certificate of
the Governor, and the directly opposite
opinion, that it is not competent to 90 be-
hind the certificate of the Governor. The
fifth was, that it is competent to go behind
the decision of the canvassing or the return
ing board, and the opposite opinion that it
is not competent to do so. "Then," Mr..
Thurman said, comes another question
Surprising the returning board not to have
gone beyond its Jurisdiction, some say its
decision may be impeached for fraud, be-
cause fraud vitiates everything, and others
say that no such inquiry is admissible at all.
We take the only course open to us we pro-
vide tribunal. This bill leaves every ques-
ton to that tribunal; it decides not one of
them; it does not intend to decide one of
them-no, not one." Now | return to my
remarks in this House. That bill being
passed by Republican Senate on the assur-
ance of the man who framed the section,
said to my associates in this House "There
is not drop of compromise in it. You are
to go before that tribunal to assert main-
tain and defend your claim that they cannot
go behind the decision of the canvassing
board" Am to be charged with bad faith
in the face of the House and of the country