The true northerner. [volume] (Paw Paw, Mich.) 1855-1920, 1877-02-02

10 the use OF TROOPS IN the HOUtn NJ the late
tion was, after spirited partisan debate, referred
to select committee OF eleven TO inquire whether
there had been an exercise OF authority not war
ranted by the constitution and laws in the use Of
BILE, with power to send for persons and papers.
THURSDAY, Jan. 25.-Senate. The debate
in the senate on the bill reported by the select
committee in regard to counting the electoral vote
was continued all night. Mr.. Morton continued
his speech in opposition to the bill. He claimed
that the bill was nagranuy Unconstitutional, that
the commission could not carry out its provisions
without going behind the returns, said the bill was
sprnkled all over with very white, pretty
meal, but the Democratic cat was re-
posing beneath it, and he earnestly urged Re-
publican Senators to vote against 1t. Mr.. Blaine
followed Mr.. Morton, and opposed the measure on
constitutional grounds. He had desired earnestly
to,supporthe bill II he could do IL consistently The
arguments adduced In its favor had persuaded him
Of its unconstitutionality, and he felt himself
compelled however reluctantly he differed
from certain ,s Senator'S to record his vote
consin, made an earnest speech in advocacy
! of the bill. He characterized il the proudest
tribute to American ststee manship that had been
prepared since the convention which framed the
constitution adjourned He would have been
glad II IL had received the unanimous approval of
! the COMMUNICATION he would have felt like one
greater than himself felt when looking upon the in
FAINT Savior He would have felt he had the sal
walton Of his people and OF his country. Mr.. Thur
| man spoke ia favor of the bill. Mr. Whyte of
Maryland, had doubts AZ to it's constitutionaiity,
but would vote for ii as temporary remedy. MIR.
Eaton, of Connecticut, the only Democrat opposing
power to count the electoral votes was
vested In the two houses Of Congress,
and that this bill, this contr,vance.
the hope that the bill would pass. Mr.. Edmunds
closed the debate with earnest appeal in benalf
of the bill. at the conclusion Of which a vote
well, Burnside, Ghafee, christiancy, Cock
rell, Conknng, Cooper, cragin, Davis, Dawes,
tSSaiss, Gordon; Howe. Johnson jones
Nla), Jones (Ney.), Kelly, Herman, Nc
Creery, Mcdonald. Mcmillan, Marcy, Merrimon,
Morrill,, Price, Randolph, Ransom, Robertson,
salisbury, sharon, Stevenson, Teller, Thurman
allace, whyte, Window, withers, wrght-7.
Nays-Blaine, Bruce. Cameron Pa,), Cameron
!wisl. Clayton, Conover, Dorsey, Eaton DEM
Hamilton, Hamlin, Ingalls,, Mitchell, Morton, Pat
terson, Sargent, Sherman. west-17.
House.-The House took up the Electoral Tribunal
bill, and Mr.. McCrary, of Iowa, member of the
joint committee, opened the debate. He said the
country in the presence Of very great and
very dangerous emergency. The present was
crisis in national affairs which the fathers of the
republic had foreseen in 1900, and which at various
periods in the nations history great statesmen had
fronted, not only with great and widespread diff
ference OF opinion on the merits of the
| question, but 1t was confronted with what
was thousand-fold more perilous, with
the fact that the American people, American states
men, American lawyers and jurists almost
equally divided, not only rs to the merits of the
question but to authorities to be cited He sub
mitted that that statesman WAS false to his duty
that that man did not come up to the cxigencies of
! the occasion who would utop short in the most
earnest endeavors TO provide some lawful mode for
the decision of this question by q tribunal whose
authority nobody could question, and in whose
csion all men would acquiesce. Mr. Huuton, of Viz
measure. lie held that just the tellers provided
for in the twenty-second joint rule were but the
organs of the two houses. 80 the commission pro-
vided for in the bill was but their organ to do for
them what they themselves might do. He also
held that the two houses had the right TO count
the votes, so they had the right Of concurrent
that might seem best TO them. Mr.. Hoar spoke
| in favor Of the bill. Nothing, he said
could be more injurious to the whole republic than
that a man should be In the Presidential office
wnom at least one-haf of the American people
| would regard al usurper. He could not conceive
that the trainers of the constitution ever thought
Of yielding to the President Of the Senate the vast
power Of counting the electoral vote. That power
| was In the two houses Of Congress Just as
the English Parliament had for centuries
regulated all questions affecting fine sue
cession to the crown. In conclusion
| Mr.. Hoar said "The act which we are about to
do will in my judgment be one of the very bravest
| in human history. Our annals have been crowded
with great achievements in war; in peace, in arts,
| in literature in commerce.; but other countries
have equsled us In those particulars, but in this
great act we staud without a rival and without
an example. For thousand years children,
with tears of JOY and pride, will read that while
in fierce strife for executive power the sun Of other
| republics after short but brilliant day
has gone down in darkness and in
blood, in their own country, too, the same great
strife has arisen that their sky has been darkeped
by the same cloud that their ship, with costly
| freight OF love and nope, encountered the same
| storm and was driven near the same rocks but that
in the midst Of the storm and darkness and conflict
| the august and awful figure of law over the
| face Of the waters, uttering its divine, con-
trolling mandate, Peace, be still" Mr..
ia, Hale ,,t Of Maine Ian spoke in opposition to
him by the bold assumption Of the power OF Con-
gress to regulate and control the election of Pres
dent, which power, in his judgment had never
been lodged IN the two houses by the trainers Of
the constitution. Whatever the popular impulse
might be now, this bin would not be sustained by
the American people when they should have time
to measure and conte mplate its consequences. 1t
struck blow at the Electoral College, which
stood as high in the constitution as
from turret to foundation stone and il substituted
| for IL the power OF Congress, which might at any
time thwart the will of the people and render nu-
gatory its delibera and expressed judgment. The
debate continued till III o'clock D. M. Hewitt,
Of New York, Caldwell, of Tennessee, Springer of
Illinois, and Willard, Of Michigan, speaking in
favor Of the bill and Monroe, of Ohio Smith of
Pennsylvania, and Garfield of Ohio, in opposition
FRIDAY, Jan. 26.--Senate. session Of
the Senate brief and no business Of Importance
was transacted. Mr.. Jones, of Florida, called up
the petition of the Democratic Presidential elect
ors of Florida, recently presented by him, asking
that their votes be counted the true return and
addressed the Senate at length in regard to the
recent election in that State. He argued
that the Tilden electors were legally elected and
had been deprived Of their rights by the State can
vassing board.
House.-The discussion of the Electoral bill was
resumed, and Messrs. Hooker Democrat, of Mis-
sissippi, Hartridge Democrat, of Georgia), aud
FELTON, Democrat, of Georga) spoke On favor of the
measure, ana against the claim that the Presidene
OF the Senate had the right TO count the electoral
votes Mr.. Mills Democrat of Texas) opposed the
bill, yet said there were some good things in it,
Mr.. Baker (Republican, of Indiana) spoke against
the bill, declared it unconstitutional and criticised
IL for excluding from the commission the Chief
Justice. characteriZing the discrimination as
an odious and unjust reflection upon
wise magistrate. Mr.. watterson (DemocraD
OF Kentucky spoke in favor of the bill. He said If
the two houses failed to agree upon some plan the
country would see the Senate declare Hayes elect
ed, and IL would see the President of the United
states, supported by the army and navy, prepared
70 seat him in Office. Mr.. Lamar Democrat of Mis-
sissippD advocated the measure He said il elm
mated the sword from the controversy and sent 81
to q tribunal whose character guaranteed Justice
right and truth in it's decisions. Mr. Hill dem.
ocrat, of Georgia gave the bill his hearty and warm
approval Mr.. Singleton Democrat, of MississippD
and Mr.. Lapham (Republican, of New York; op-
posed the measure on constitutional grounds Mr.
Bland democrat, of Missouri) sustained the bill
because IL provided remedy for existing diffcul-
ties, but he expressed his belief that no