The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1877-07-05

ment, tnOugn III pIOV6u INC lhvp pleV Vho
HAYES claimants we're not duly appoint-
ed, and had no title 10 the Office Of cleo
tors, did not invalidate the acts previous
ly done by them while they were de facto
in the exercise of the powers they
usurped. There is just and necessary
rule of law which declares that the valid
ity of acts regularly done by an officer
shall not depend on the title by which
he holds the Office. You may remove
Sheriffby quo tDdrrdnto without destroy,
ing the titles of all who purchased land
at his sales, or Judge without vaCating
his DEGREES, or treasurer without say
ing that his payment of public debt is
not satisfaction; but where a person as
sumes special authority TO do partlc-
ular thing the validity Of the act does de-
pend on the authority TO do it. This lat
ter rule applies here, These electors
claimed a right to vote for the State un'
der a special appointment given them to
do that one act. When a competent
court adiudicated as matter of fact that
the Hayes electors had no appointment,
il was logical and legal necessity which
declared the unauthorized votes to be
null and void. If this were not the
principle, then any impostor, or any
number Of fimpostors, mightsend up their
ballots, and one would be as good as an
other
But, again, let it not be forgotten that
the Tilden electors had also voted at the
same time in the same way. Why dld
not this fact make as much weight tor
them as for the others2 1t will excite
the wonder of the world to learn that, in
the opinion of the eight, a person who
voted under an appointment given him
by the people according to law, could not
be even de facto elector, but another
person who had nothing TO claim by ex-
cept the false, fraudulent, and void dec
laration Of Returning Board was good
de facto, if he was good for nothing eIse'
This doctrine of de facto sanctifcation,
saving acts which have no other relish
of salvation in them," and making the
votes of unauthorzed>men as good as II
they came from persons duly appointed,
cuts a great figure throughout the whole
case. 1t is not applicable, but the eight
apply it everywhere, and, strange to say, |
they never use it when it does not make
in favor of some fraud or other. One
who votes according to the public will OF
the State, legally expressed through the
ballot boxes, is de facto nothing, But if |
he was defeated or ineligible, he is DE
facto all he wants to be, One of the
HAYES electors in Louisiana was Fed
eral officer; his election was forbidden
by the Constitution OF the United States,
and he was not elected but beaten at the
polls; de facto strained its utmost power
on him, and pulled him through in spite
of Constitution and people both. But
his Democratic competitor, who had act
ed as an eleetor in the same way and TO
the same extent, was legally chosen by |
an overwhelming majority, and constl'
tutionally eligible; therefore de tacto |
could do nothing for him.
Fraud Under the Forms Of Law.
In all the discussions of the subject the |
men disposed to favor the conspiracy |
a most profound veneration for
the "forms of law" This was the key
note struck at New Orleans by the visit
ing committee, and it is heard in every |
subsequent argument of counsel and
on that side. 1t seemed
to be understood among them that for
NAL cheat was perfectly safe from expo
sure. If the sepulChre was whited on
the outside, it made no difference that it
was filled with corruption, dead mems
bones, and all uncleanliness." No refuge
of lies could be swept away, no hiding
place of falsehood could ever be uncov-
cred, # it was built in the prescribed
form. Only give it the legal shape, and
the overhowing scourge would be turned
aside. But legal form, however valuable
as a covering for fraud, was, in their
Judgment, no protection for truth or JUS
tice or public right. The will of Louis
lana was pronounced at the election with
all the soiemnities required by the law
of the State and of the Unitod States
The appointment of the Tilden electors
On the 9TH of November was perfectly
egal piece of work; there was not flaw
in the record of it as it came from the
hands Of the appointing power. But it
was looked on with perfect contempt
Neither the visiting committee, nor the
Hayes counsel, nor the eight commits
sioners, bestowed on it any of their love.
Their affections were otherwise engaged;
hey gave the homage and devotion of
heir hearts to the beautiful regularity,
he exquisite precision, with which the
Returning Board compounded its false
certificate.
Another paradox of the eight is curious
enough to be noted. They declared re-
,eatedly that they had no power to try
contested election case, and for that rea-
ION they would not look at the evidence
which showed what persons we're duly
appointed electors by the people. Now
mark The case was this. Each of
hose votes came accompanied by what
vas asserted to be proof that it was cast
W electors duly appointed. The con-
lict was to be determined by the verify
ng power which Congress unquestiona-
Div has, and which the Commissioners
expressly assumed when they swore
hey would decide who were duly APP
pointed. To decide it one way or the
,ther required precisely the same juris-
liction, and called into exercise exactly
he same faculties. Yet they held if
hey decided according to the truth in
avor of the electors actually appointed
hey would be trying contested election;
1ut if they decided in favor of the pre-
enders, who had nothing but frauGu-
ent certificate, they would not be trying
contested election; in other words, their
was full and ample to decide
t falsely, but wholly unequal to the duty
If deciding it truly.
Ineligible Electors Recognized.
Perhaps nothing shows more plainly
he animus of the eight Commissioners
han the determination they made upon
he case of Brewster, ineligible elector in
Louisiana. Keep in mind their defined
duty was to decide who we're appointed
and what votes were provided for by the
Constitution, and think bow they per-
formed it in this part Of the case. Brew
,ter was not only defeated at the polls
ike the rest; he was besides a Federal
1fficeholder, and the Constitution ex.
Dressly declares that no such person
1