The weekly clarion. [volume] (Jackson, Miss.) 1863-1882, 1877-07-11


volts should he taken from Tilden and given
q ityes. A. this required many distinct
Iuitit2s based upon contradictory grounds.
tue ptth OF the commission was Tot only
steep but crooked
Inc great aud important duty east upon
L3e conmi~sIo" by special law and bv a
speei4l oath OF each member was decided.
ia ne ease OF contested votes from State,
whether any and what votes from such
= ate are the votes provided tor nv the Con
stttuti"n OF the United States. and how many
ana What persons were duly appointed cleo
tors ~ such ) ate" It j. not denied that tie
soc poWerof ppsinting electors for the State
OF LOUISIANA anC Florida is in the people. lt
was then and still * AN admitted fact that
the people had exercised the power OF ap-
p1ihtmeut ia the prescribed and proper
Way they did duly make an appointment
OF electors. aud their act was duly recorded.
and 80 made perpetual memory. This
thing was not ''ugHe in cOrner:H it was
''seen and known If all men" That each
Of the tao States named had Only appointed
Iiiden electors az a regular election called
for that purpose on the eth Of Novembef.
in pursuance OF law, was a part of their
history as much as the fact that they We're
States OF the Union. All THE members OF
the con- mission knew it rs well as they knew
the 4rogra phiral position Tallahassee or
New Orleans. 1t needed no proof; but IL
specified evidence had been required. there
was the record. from which the IrdJh giared
upon them as clear the sun. They shut
their eyes upon the record, and refused to
see how many and what persons were duly
appointed electors" ny the people. but lis
eued eagerly To the evidence .aljntde though
/ il Wa-) which showed 'show many and what
persons" had been des gnated by the return
ing officers It was ultimately held eight
t. severn that the appoinIees o. the Return
ing Board We're duly appointed. and the APP
/ pointers ot the people We're unduly app0ln-
ted. Dill the eight suppose that the legal
/ power 10 make such an appointment was
vested ny law in the Returning Boards
Did they think it was not vested IN the peo-
4 p er No, that l. impossible. But they may
/ have couscicutiously believed that the inter
ct OF their faction would be served by
! Hayes election. They may have been
! prompted by virtuous admiration of car
4 bag government, and were sincerely
anxious to save il from lden's reform.
ITS PErImoGGNG.
But this decision in favor OF fraud which
| so shocked The common sense and common
/ honesty Of the nation was not made with
/ ont some aCtem pt TO justify it. The eight
/ gave reasons 50 many and 50 plausible that
+ Kellogg and Wells must have chuckieI with
delight when thry heard them. One ar
gunent very seriously urged was that it
i would be Troublesome aud require a great
! deal Of time, TO ascertain who was duly APP
| pointed by the pe pie. Il was much easier
/ 70 accept the false vote and say no more
about it, To decide how many and what
persons got certificates from the Returning
Board was a short and simple process; but
to push the inquiry behind that-to inquire
whether the certificate was honest TO look
for the evidence which would show who
were duly app0inteG-htc Eub0r hoe 0plls est.
The seven reminded the eight, but remi nd
cd them in vain, that the due appointment
win ch nobody in the world, except the peo-
Etc. had The right to make. vas the very
thing which they were there to find out
and they could not be excused from u duty
to which they We're pledged and sworn by
the mere Inconvenience of performing it.
Besides, the eight knew very well that
there was no difficulty IN it; il was but
looking at the record of the appotHtm ent az
| the people made 1t up; they could read II
as they ran; the truth was palmer than the
lie; the hOneety OF the case was a5 east ~
seen as tina fraud. But no persuasion could
| influence them 70 cast even glance at the
actual appointments What did they think
this commission was made for? Why was
; this great combination OF learning and
statecraft set up? According TO the eigh;
its sole purpose was, not to determine any
matter in dispute between the parties, but
| merely to declare that the Returning
Boards had certified for the Hayes electors
which everybody knew already, aud no.
] body ever denied If its object was what
. the law sad-to decide who were duly APP
/ | pointed-then the eight succeeded in ma
+ | king it merely splendid abortion, because
{ among other reasons, it was too muci
trouble to make it anything else.
Bat the commission, following the leaC
: of counsel for Mr. Hayes, Insisted that tn,
: ! certificate of the proper State officer ough
. ! to be regarded as conclusive evidence o
!, the appointment made By the people. 1t i
: undoubtedly true that the State has ri 9h
II to speak on this subject through her own or
!, ganS, and when she does 50 speak her vote
Il should be regarded as true. Bat what Off
i Ger Is her proper organ The Governor be
20 ing her political chief, and his certiticat
being required by act of Congress, it Woul
not have been unreasonable to hold that
was conclusive unless tainted with fraud
The Hayes electors had the Executive Ger
: | tiffcate in Louisiana aud Florida, and thi
in regard to those States, gave the eight
= ! great legal advantage. But they threw
| away, abandoned the atLestation of tn
- Governor as worthless. claimed no taith O
- credit for it, and pronounced il open to con
~ tradiction. no matter how ho1estlY it ma
i, have been given. What was the meanin
= Of this phenomenal ruling which apparent
Nv opened the door of investigation eve
- wider than the Democrats asked? It wa
- understood by every body. The commits
u sion WAS hedging for Oregon. The eigt
Z were reaching across to the Pacific for tt
~ one vote there, which was just as importaI
- a. the twelve on the Gulf of Mexico
:, Bar having gone behind the Governor
> certificate tor the sake of correcting error
~ could there be any possible justification f
=" | stopping before the truth was reached?
- tho head OF the Commonwealth, whose a
~ ! test4tion is required by Federal law, wei
81 for nothing whenever it was contradcte
- how could the coHclusiveness be assertt
- of a paper made by subordinate officers III
= -, kuo nm outside of the State, anG pOWerle
w even by the local law to make a certifica
~ of moro than prima facie validity? \
- the Electoral Commission eight to seve
- decided that the Governors certiffca
might be set aside for a mere mistake
-! - law or fact while that of the Returuii
" Board would stand, though known to
founded on falsehood aud saturated
through with corruption.
EVIDENCE ALTUNDE.
icy
re- The unvarying preference of the Gig
;ts Commissioners for the false over the TT
rm becomes very striking at this point. VIII
OF they 90 behind tie Governors paper
70 they found lying dltuHde two other sets
,aa documents, one OF which was Il record
pa the actual appointment made by the pc
roa pie: the other was n mere fabrication of t
mo Returning Board without any semblance
in truth: they embraced the latter with
lie the .arior of sincere affection, and reject
ns. the former with ali possible marks OF thu
WOE dislike.
ar To give the DEGREES of the Returni
~ Boards the conclusive effect claimed
L. them it was necessary to hold that til
'ra were legally invested with judicial powe
oil and that their jurisdiction, whether right
hst or enormously exercised, was absolute o1
iog the whole subject matter. In Florida t
10 statute which creates the board gave
:, ;. nothing except ministerial powers. and t
- supreme Court of that State solemnly p
W: | noi,uccl its claim of judicial authority