The Cairo bulletin. [volume] (Cairo, Ill.) 1872-1878, 1877-02-24
THE TRIBUNAL.
Tha Aroumsnt In tn Oregon Case
10 Continued.
srArsxY rArrHHws EXPLAINS THE
4EPVBLICAN re0ITI0N.
wseSs, nessgnatsen as Postmaster ~
salem.
Addresses BY Evarts and Hsrrisk.
rnE OREGON CASE.


the OREGON CASE.
WARRINGTON, Feb. 22.--The electoral
commission met In the supreme court
room at 10 o'clock.
ADDRESS OF STANLEY MATTHEWS.
Mr.. Matthews made an address in OPP
position to the Cronin certificate No. 2,
commencing with the denial that they
had asserted in the Florida case that the
certificate was final and conclusive. and
said they had undertaken to draw line
OF demarkation between the act OF the
state and federal authority which took
the matter up after it had left the state.
They also undertook to draw line be-
tween things and proofs, between the
certificate and the thing certified, to show
that the certificate was but the shadow.
the thing certified being the substance,
and that when the certificate did not
show the thing certified truly it could be
corrected. 1t was surprise, he said,
to find that their adversaries had not
only taken their position on the Florida
and Louisiana cases, but had gone beyond
1t and accepted the dogma which they
had improperly ascribed to the side with
which he was identified. He maintained
that they stood to-day on the ground
they occupied in the beginning and
which had been hallowed by the decision
of this tribunal, viz: that a certificate
based on the returns was conclusive evil
dence of election.
In the Florida and Louisiana cases tho
offers to 60 behind returns were menac-
Ing, and the offers grew stronger and
larger as the certainty was obtained that
they would not be called on to make
them good, and great deal of patriotic
indignation was INDUCED In nc aneged
countenancing of fraud ant wrong. The
certificate of the governor was sought
to be introduced here as substitute for
the canvass. 1t was signed by the secre-
tary of state simply as attesting witness
and not rs canvasser of votes. That the
expression OF the commission was not es.
sential to tho discharge Of the duties Of
the office. he eontended was well.settled
principle OF law. The certificate of the
governor OF Oregon did not conform to
the statutes of tho United States or OF
Oregon. Suppose the certificate had
been authorized. 1t gave the election
to Odell, Cartwright End Cronin, q
body OF three persons, to meet
consult. deliberate and vote together
in the college that necessarily con
sisted Of three. He contended that on,
could not act as body and that tho 90
of . quorum could only be accepted a:
the acts of the body. This view OF the
case had been sustained by decisions in the
supreme court of Oregon. In regard to
what constituted vacancy, he con-
tended that when the object was to keep
up body to the tull number for the pro.
lection of the interests Of the people,
when it was sought to guard against
every possibility of the college net being
full, the word otherwise should be
construed literally. and that it was in
tended to cover all vacancies that might
occur. II the governor was q competent
tribunal to set aside the election. then
vacancies existed which the remaining
members were empowered to fill.
MIR. Matthews combated the PROPOSE
ton that the ineligibility OF Watts made
q non-election, or that the votes cast for
an ineligible candidate were void. lie
also contended that the English decis.
ions which declared the candidate who
was eligible but received the less number
OF votes than his ineligible opponent
elected had not been adopted as the
American rule which was that when
such case occurred neither was entitled
to the office. If, however, an eligible
officer was objected TO by nobody his Off.
cial acts stood rs long as he held Office.
In relation to self-execution Of the consti.
tuition he argued that unless there was
legislative provision it could not be exc
cuted. The prohibition OF states from
making laws impsiring contracts could
never be executed but tor legislation.
Why, 1t gave judicial power to try al
legged violations Of provision.
Mr.. Matthews closed with the declara-
ton that lac had appeared not as counsel
Tor any party, but in support Of a great
constitutional principle regardless of any
popular elsmor that might be excited
For . governor to take upon himseu ex
ecuuve. judicial and legislative power
was to bring about complication tina
would make the confusion OF the govern
ment inextricable.
Judge Strong said counsel had nov
consumed two hours each and still tn
question Of the admissibility of evidenc
was before the commission. He though
that 1t should be received now subject I
the judgment Of the commission as to il
effect.
The proposition was adopted. bu
neither papers called for In subpen
duees tseu,n served upon the postmaster
general were at hand, nor were witnesse
present, and the commission took recess
EVIDENCE.
AFTER reeess Mr.. Nerrick offered tn,
certified copy Of the commission OF Jobr
W. Watts a. postmaster, dated Feb. IS
1873.
Mr.. Evsrts objected to the papers a,
not authenticated, but said the postmss