Perrysburg journal. (Perrysburg, Wood Co., O. [Ohio]) 186?-1965, 1877-02-09
The Florida Case.

AT the meeting of the Electoral Com.
mission on the I'd Hon. John A. Kasson, of
Iowa, one of the obiectors TO the Demo.
cratic returns from Florida, presented
the facts In very forcible and convinc.
ing manner. He said:
What is the case before usP First, a Ger.
ti1cate comes before Congress, as required
by the Constitution and laws of the United
States, and in conformity TO the statutes Of
the State OF Florida, certifying the electoral
vote Of one Of those States, which my honor.
able friend who last spoke (Tucker) was
pleased TO call the sovereign States" OF this
Union. That certificate Is first opened and
read There is second certificate opened
In the Joint meeting OF the two houses Of
Congress, In which the persons signing the
same precede their certihcation bv a certih b
cate signed by an officer not recognized by
the laws of the United States nor by the stat
utes Of Florida as certifying officer, being
the Attorney. General OF the State OF Florida
Second, he certiies that there is no provision
of the law of Florida whereby the result Of
said returns can be certified TO the Executive
OF said State, admitting by that certificate,
II II has any force at all, that his action Is
without law ana without any sanction by the
statutes Of the State. Third, the electors
certify, by their own action, as to their own
qualifications, and they themselves notified
the Governor OF their election.
| InCu tncTe is CtTllHChle NO "a ccTllncAte
of uncertfying persons in view OF the law,
State and National. That certificate was
presented and opened.
There is third certificate still more extraor.
dlnary--still more wanting in the elements
ofverifcation--also so demand ,ng con sderatop.
1t is entirely eJ post fdcto-it is certified by
an officer not in existence until the functions
of the office had been exhausted; certificate
which recites the proceedings In tribunals
subordinate and superior to the judiciary Of
the State; certificate which a canvassing
board might, under some circumstances, re.
port to the State officers, but which has nev.
er been sent to the Congress of the United
States or to the President OF the Senate dur
ing the hundred years in which we have been
a republic.
The proceedings in the court, recited in it,
are all subsequent to that time which by the
Constitution and laws of the United States
is the time fixed for the performance OF
judicial functions. These two certificates
are wanting in all elements Of constitutional
and legal validity which should give them
place before this commission, In the con.
| dition in which the laws OF the country now
are, or in which the laws of the State were
on the sixth day of December, when these
functions were exercised Furthermore, il
| certificate number one is constitutional
1 and legal expression of the vote OF the State
| of Florida, Of course that question being
settled In favor OF certificate number one,
obviates all necessity for considering certif-
Gates numbers two and three, and / ought
perhaps to say TO the honorable commission
1t is fortunate that they did not grant the
request of the objectors to adjourn until to.
morrow. The next mail might have brought
to you certificate number four, rcciting new
action and new proceedings before the
| courts, and no end would be found to the
papers that mipEt be presented in party or
| personal interest as establishing the retroact-
i've right to exercising function in the
/ atn n,,fE I'll Tln obi 20 h., q
certificate are substantially one, namely:
There was fraudulent return;" that it
| was fraudulently issued, not by reason of
| anything which appears in the action of the
certifcation or presenting OF the certificate,
! but because Of the action of other people
Mr.. Kasson here referred TO the frauds in
Jackson, where he said the Republican vote
was rejected, and spoke of case where a
railroad train of passengers got off and
voted the Democratic ticket, and said: az
do not believe that this commission, by the
! Constitution or law, was ever intended or
has the power to 90 to the extent that would
be required to probe these mutual allega-
! tions on both sides TO the bottom"
Mr.. Kasson argued at great length against
the power of the commission to go behind
the returns, and said: Are you to revise the
proceedings of all State elections and State
tribunals appointed by State laws, or are
you to count what Is properly certified
and presented to your IL it be otherwise
let the Constitution be amended, and let it
be declared by this tribunal to be amended
so that 1t shall read: " Each State shall ap.
point, in such manner as the Legislature
thereof may direct, number of electors,
subject to revision by the Congress of the
United States, which shall have power to de.
termine whether such electors have per
| formed their functions to the satisfaction of
said Congress" Weare brought inevitably
TO an amendment to the Constitution which
| SOnUht n ahSOlntaIy 10 nf
the states, which required every ballot in
the Presidential election to be cast on the
same day that they might be freed from cen
tralized influence. Every member of the
commission knows the history of the adop-
| ton OF this clause, and yet we are brought,
| say perpctually, tU the question, Shall we
now go on and complete the absorption Of
the absolute Independent right OF the States
to appoint the electors in their own way and
say that 1t is subject to the two houses of
Congress whether they have done or shall do
what is necessary!
the certificate of the Governor against the
truth! Is there not reason, on the other
hand, why 1t should not be asked: Are we
to take the certificate of fifteen gentlemen
against the truthg Mr.. Kasson continued: /:
Mr. Field proposed in his argument to show
the jugglery by which Hayes electors got
their certificates. May ask this tribunal, If
there is prima Jdcie presumption for or
| against fraud, whether II exists against those
officers elected before fraud could have been
contemplated, against a board that acted at
the time required by the State law, against
board that acted at the time required
by constitutional law, against a board
that acted in Ignorance Of the result
in other States? Or does that presumption
OF fraud exist against men who knew the
importance of the change OF the result in
| Florida, against men who acted with the
knowledge of the necessity of actionS They
undertook to accomplish this result with
men who were organized as new tribunal,
and enacted new law TO accomplish that
result. II there be.fraud, IL there be con-
spiracy, as alleged, where does the presump-
tion of law, under those circumstances, place
1t? Inevitably ii places it where the motive
OF the act, the knowledge requisite to give
the motive effect and purpose to be accom-
plished, were all before the eyes of the per-
sons participant In it, Fraud cannot be so
presumed against parties that act in con-
formity with law and in discharge OF duty,
at the time required by law and in the man
rer required by law, as 1t can be presumed
against those who do IL outside of the pro-
visions of the law and with full knowledge
Of the effect which would be produced by it.
III you have the right to say that another set
of votes must he counted in Florida, you
have the right to say that another set OF
votes must be counted In New York. II you
take jurisdiction to determine the mere nine
ty votes which constitute one of the alleged
majorities, TO upset the Electoral College
that might exist there, you might go to my
State and assert that the 1000 majority there
should be upset.
An Infamous Witness.