The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1877-01-18
THE WHOLE QUESTION PLAINLY
STA TED.

tN,Wa EWfBlf ---T- bA
Z United States Senator Gordon, Of Ga,
in his letter to the Governor ofthat State,
meets the question Of counting the Elec'
toral votes very concisely. His letter
SLOWS the trained lawyer, and those who
read carefully his views and statements,
we think, will admit the hopeletsness of
getting Hayes counted in. We give an
extract:
"If, foY instance, the prima facie pro-
gramme which was the Republican plan
until the action of Governor Grover, of
Oregon, is 10 be adopted, Mr.. Tilden has
1856 votes and is elected II, on the con-
trary, Congress is to gobehind the GER
ti6cates and count the votes as given by
the people of the States Mr.. Tilden has
1876 without South Carolina, and of course
is elected. -u.
"Ifthe twenty-second Joint Rule is to
be re.adopted, allowing either House to
object to the counting Of State, of course
the House of ofRepresentatives will object
to counting Louisiana, FL riGa, and pos
sibly South Carolina for Hayes. 1t can
not be supposed that the House will ever
consent to have these States counted as
manipulated by Returning Boards, who
have usurped powers not conferred by
the laws of those States, and expressly
denied by the Courts in two Of them.-
The result on that plan would be to leave
Mr.. Hayes with only 1865 votes, and of
course not elected. - ..
"If the bill of Senator Morton, now be-
fore the Senate on motion of Senator Ed
munds, should be passed, requiring all
the votes to be counted from States that
have sent up but one set of certificates,
or the one counted upon which both
Houses agree where there are two re-
turns, then also would the result be Mr.,
Tiden's election. '.
Again, if that clause of the Constitu-
ton which requires for the election of
President a majority of all the Electors
appointed, be construed TO mean ma
jority of Electors legally chosen, and the
votes Of one Or more States should be re-
i,ocIed. it would leave lS4 a majority, and
Mr.. Tilden is elected. Or, if the other
construction be given to that clause, viz:
that it requires 1856 votes to elect-that is
a majority of all the Electors appointed,
whether counted or not, then, although
there would be no election by the people
in case any State we're rejected, yet the
House would elect, and would elect Mr..
Tilden."
We think Senator Gordon clearly dem
onstrates that Mr.. Tilden will be declar.
ed lawfully elected and will be inaugura-
ted. Few Republicans now claim that
the President of the Senate is the author
ity to count and declare the result. But
it is possible the two Houses will fail to
agree upon a rule or mode of procedure,
and then the Constitution itself must
guide. Every rule that has been adopted
for the counting of the votes since 1888
including the twenty-second Joint Rule,
and even the proposed bill Of Mr.. Nor
ton, has recognized the soundness of the
following statement of Senator Gordon I:
"But suppose the Joint Committee
should fail to agree, and the counting be
left where the Constitution leaves it, to
the two Houses. In that case the vote of
no State to which objection was made,
could be lawfully counted; because, as
counting il an affirmative act to be per,
formed by both Houses, it cannot be
done by one. What is the business of
both jointly cannot be done by one sep
arately. In each State, therefore, where
there are more than one set of returns,
neither could be counted if objection
were made. A count by one where it is
clearly made the duty of two is no count
at all. There is, | think, no answer
to this conclusion for, to count, and
of course to count correctly, is the
clear mandate of the Constitution to the
two Houses of Congress. Suppose the
Republicans assume the position that
every State must be counted unless OBJ
jected to by both Houses, and that in
those States from which two returns are
sent up that the one shall be counted,
unless both Houses object, which has the
Governors certificate attached. Sup
pose, further, that they base this claim
on the doctrine that each State is entitled
to its Electoral vote. Then the answer
to the first position is the one l have al
ready given, viz: That the Constitution
requires the two Houses jointly 10 count
and not Jointly to Object. The vote to be
counted is what the Houses must agree
upon, and not the vote to be rejected
And the answer to the States-rights doc
trine-falsely so-Called-is that if State
speaks in matter affecting the interests
of all the other States, it must be permit
ted to speak the voice of its people, and
not the voice of a Returning Board. The
thirty-seven other States are entitled to
protection against the forced and false
utterances of a throttled State. Better
that State be silenced temporarily than
that she, under compulsion, should say
an untruth, the precise reverse of the
verdict rendered by majority of her
people,"
That these views obtain in all parts Of
the country is evidence that they will
triumph. Senator Gordon has rendered
a service by giving them to his people SO
rorcibly and we'll