The daily Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1873-1877, 1877-01-12
Friday. January 70. 1877.
THE ELECTORAL COUNT.
(Concluded.)

The Constitution requires that the vote OF
each State shall be opened by. the presiding
officer, the President of the Senate. When
opened the votes are to be counted. The
question on which the whole thing turns,
to which our legislation is directed, except
mere machinery, is, what is vote ola State
We all agree that whatever pretends to be
vote or looks like vote, but is not vote,
should not be counted, SO the thing
which we are to provide for by this legis-
latlon is a means of ascertaining fairly aud
truly, according to the Constitution and
the law, what is the vote, the will of each
particular State in the choice of Presi-
dent
The Constitution says: THE vote shall
then be counted. What is vote? The
Constitution does not mean that every
paper which a selectman or justice of the
peace may send here shall be counted
What is vote2 The vote, under the
Constitution and the law, is the lawful and
authoritative expression of the electors Of
that State, chosen as the Constitution and
the law provide. Nothing else is vote
That is question which must be decided
Somebody must decide it. If you are TO
remit question of that kind to the decision
of two separate bodies, each acting indie
pSuuNbNAy VI 'uC OtuClN dIt you W
land? Of course you are forced in that
case to one of two alternatives, You are
forced to say, as the present rule does,
that nothing shall be considered a vote
that the two houses do not agree is vote,
or you are to say that everything shall be
considered vote that the two houses can
not concur in saying is not a vote; and
there you are. You are at loggerheads at
once.-Februaary 25, 1875.
SENATOR EATON, OF CONNECTICUT. =
A certain return comes up; the seal of the
State is upon that return, or a pretended
seal of the State, whether stolen or not:
it is there. How do you reconcile these
two provisions? | take it that men are
generally made OF the same material, [
apprehend that if a return came here |
believed was fraud, that | had no doubt
the seal of the State was fraudulentiv
placed upon, l would vote against the. re-
ception OF the return, and my friend from
Indiana would in the same way vote
against the other return and for some
good reason. Our feelings of party might
have something to do with our judgement,
but we would both endeayor to be honest
February Is, 1875,
SENATOR Roscoe CONKLING, OF New
YORK. But go further than to maintain
the naked power of Congress to inquire.
insist that we can utilize the result of the
inquiry, and employ the facts in our action
upon counting or refusing to count
electoral votes for President and Vice
President February 7, 1873.
SENATOR BOUTWELL,, OF MAssACHU.
SETS. I think the counting of the votes,
in the language Of the Constitution, means
something more than mere examination
OF the certificates returned from the cleo
tors OF the respective States. There are
several presidents, think, which 60 &c
show that our predecessors have also
entertained that opinion. But it must, il
the nature OF the case, mean something
more Under the first section of this bill
the votes are to be counted unless the tive
houses concur in the rejection of them
The reason for this, it seems TO me, is
plain The presentation of a single
certificate in the usual form is prima facit
evidence Of the truth of what the certificate
contains, and there being no testimony
cOntrOyerting that prima-face case, j
certainly ought to stand until it is over
ruled by the concurrent judgement of thu
two branches of Congress authorized Il
pass upon the question. But when twt
certificates are returned from the sam,
State it cannot be said that there is
prima face case for either of thest
certificates, aud with less reason can it b.
said that there is a prlma.tacie case fO
both Of these conflicting certificates, ant
therefore there Is not prima-facie cas-
for anything, Two consequences follow
from this state of things: First, that tn,
counting of the votes under the Con
titutlOn means something more than tn
mere examination of the paper certificate
otherwise there would be no possible mean
by which Congress, when there we're tw
certificates returned from a given state
would have the power of ascertaining wha
the truth is. Hence, in the very natur
of the case, there is power under tn
Constitution, vested in the two houses 20
Congress, If the occasion demands il, to @
behind the certificate and inquire into til
facts; aud that is a general power lodge
III all tribunals and assemblies of me
where there is authority to ascertain tn
truth i'll regard to an election. Secondly
it follows that neither of these certificate
can be accepted and a result deduced fror
it unless the two houses concur
accepting that certificate; and from that
third conclusion necessarily results, that i
unfortunately, through accident or intrigu
or the Vaccinations Of persons hostile {
the true interests of the country, two IT
turns come in from given State, and it
not in the power of anybody to demon
trate to the two houses which is the tru
return, that State must lose its vote This
is what happens in all cases where tn
truth cannot be ascertained; some or
suffers as a consequence of that INABILITY
and no scheme that we can devise will ri
US Of that difficulty. March Is. 1876
SENATOR CHRlsTIANCY, OF MICHIGAN
Still this question of the authenticity
the certificate, though not provided for
apparently thought of by the trainers
the Constitution, is actually and necessar
ly involved in the counting of the vote
which they did provide for, and therefor
within every recognized principle of int
probation must be considered as havir
been contemplated by them, and yet the
have made no express provision for Il
decision Of the question arising upon sue
difference, But is no mode for its d
clslOn to be fairly implied? If tthe mot
OF deciding such difference between Il
two houses is implied or fairly inferab
from the provision actually made, tn
implication is as much part of the Co
stitution as if expressed, and no differe
mode OF deciding the question would
within the power Of Congress. Now, if
be true that under the Constitution Il
counting is to be considered, in legal {
feet, the act of the two houses and if, al
have suggested, the question of the d
naturalization OF the certificates of Gle
ton is necessarily involved and included