The Wheeling daily register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1864-1878, 1877-02-23
fed copy OF the commission of John W.
Watts, as postmaster, dated February
13 1879

f1ed copy OF the commission OF John w
Watts, as postmaster, dated February
13, 1873.
Mr.. Evarts objected to the papers a
not authenticated, but said the Postmas
ter General was in attendance ready Il
verify the papers from his Office.
Judge Clifford sustained the objection
but said they had right to have them
certified under order of the commission
Mr.. Evarts waived his objection, and
Mr.. Merrick next presented the commits
sion of Henry N. Hill as postmaster
dated January 3, 1877, in which it was
recited that he was appointed November
3, 1876, and that on the 11th day OF
December he executed his bond and took
the oath of office.
Postmaster Geneaal Tyner was called
by Mr.. Evsrts. The telegram from
Watts, reslgning the Postmastership was
produced, and witness admitted this was
received Nov. 14th, and the answer &C.
cepting the resignation was sent the same
day. On the oath of November witness
received letter through Special Post
Office Agent Underwood, in which Watts
rendered his resignation. On the l4th
of November witness telegrsphed TO
Underwood to take charge .ot the office
till Watts successor was appointed. On
the Oath of November witness received
letter from Underwood stating that he
had taken charge of the office
according to instructions. Other
kilograms and letters were
produced to show the details in con.
nection with the resignation of Watts,
and the appointment and qualification of
his successor
Mr.. Thurman inquired If there was
any law or rule Of the depsr tment that
required the accounts OF postmaster to
be settled before his resignation could be
accepted
The Postmaster. General replied that
he was not aware OF any.
John w. Watts was called and testi-
fed to the same facts relative to his resiy-
nation and its acceptance.
j. NJ. McGrew, the sixth Auditor, was
called and testified that the accounts OF
Watts had been adjusted and settled up
to and including the l4Lh Of November.
Mr.. Evarts commenced his argument
at 1:30 o'clock with q claim that the
course pursued on that side in connec.
tion with this case was consistent with
their claims in the Florida and Lou 'siana
cases. In those cases the certia-
Gates had been in accordance
with the canvass and they
held now that the certificate should con-
form to the csnvass-these two conform.
ing. the evidence was conclusive, and
the canvass, he maintained, was in sub
stance the certificate, not the form. He
charged the opposition had changed
these claims with the different cases, and
for that reason had been compelled to
change counsel.
MIR. Evarts then took up the certificate
of Messrs. Odell, Cartwright and Watts,
claiming that in it every requirement of
the Constitution had been complied with.
He insisted that the evidence of the title
rested in this certificate, and not in the
one which had the governors signature.
The absence of certified lists was through
default of the governor and secretary of
state, and not through any neglect OF the
electors. The refusal of these officials
to furnish a list was desertion
of duty, and such desertions
OF duty always had an object. The Ger.
tlficate contained more. 1t contained an
abstract of the votes cast for Presiden-
tisl electors rs on file in the office of the
Secretary of State, certificate by s.
+. Oh ,dwick, Secretary of State, and that
enclosed was true copy of the abstract,
and had affixed the great seal to the
CODY. Besides this there were in the
minutes of the college the res
ignation of Watts, VIII ch was re-
ceived and accepted. The act had
been done openly under an uncertain
idea that he might have beeu disquali-
fed. Watts did his duty for he would
not put in peril one Of the votes of the
State of Oregon. The votes had been
cast and the ballots were here. Under the
Constitutional acts of 1892 and the laws
of Oregon, these minutes were plenary
evidence OF the validity of these electors.
Mr.. Merrick then addressed the Com.
mission on the Democratic side. He
SAID he addressed himself to the tribunal
believing that they would adhere to their
prev ious decisions, and apply the same
principles 10 the decision Of the Oregon
case that they did TO the louisiana and
Florida cases. He must consider that
the real meaning of their judgment in
these cases was that the certificate OF the
Governor was conclusive, and an ulti-
mate act performed by the State, beyond
which they had no power to 60.
Mr.. Merrick argued that the laws
in Louisiana and Florida in reference TO
the ascertainment of the result Of the
appointment of electors were similar to
the law of Oregon, and stated that TO
withhold the commission or to withhold
the certificate from the party deemed
by the governor to be ineligible 10 office,
was the legitimate performance OF his
constitutional and proper executive
trust. You have told US, said he, that
the State cannot Interfere with
an elector, whether he be eligi.
bic or ineligible, whether his election
be secured by fair means or foul. You
have told us that it cannot be interfered
with except between the time OF the
conclusion of the returning board and
the time of his voting. The new State
of Oregon seeking to perform her duty,
and this much abused executive seeking
70 protect that State from the odium OF
having wantonly violated the Constitu-
ION OF the United States, have solemnly
determined that an elector claiming
10 be elected was not elected. The Gov
ernor of Oregon could not have given q
cer,if cate TO an ineligible candidate
without violating his oath and being
guilty of an intrsction Of the Federal
Constitution.
Mr.. Merrick claimed N Cronin held
a certificate with the great seal OF the
State attached, he had title 10 the oftiee.
What hsd Wattsl Nothing. The oppoe-
ing counsel said 10 considering the eligi-
biiity OF the title possessed BY Watts,
that he had certificate from the Secrets
~ of State as 70 the canvass OF votes.
VI ns, i,d this Certificate purport TO be