The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1877-02-28
THE ELECTORAL COMMISSION.
Counting the Vote Of Souill Carolina for
Hayes.
Angry Debates and Hot Words In tAs
n, Crst sessiun.
Payue's aud Abbott's Complimentary Al.
lusitns to Jnstloas Bradley and Miller.
ttspt oial to N. o. Democrat |

IspSoial to n. u. democrat
WASHINGTON, Feb. a. THE vote OF the
Commission on South Carolina was
taken at five minutes past o'clock to-
night. It was the old, old story of . to
Z, that Rutherford needed the votes Of
South Carolina and must have them.
The secret session OF the Commission
was productive Of some spicy oolloquies
and some hard hits by Abbott and
Payne cot Bradley and Miller. After
EdmuAds had opened the services with
few remarks, and Hunton had made
short speech, Bradley rose with an
other long, ponderous written opinion
against the Democratic offer OF proof
that there wns such indiscreet use OF
troops and 30 much coercion of black
voters to compel them to vote for
Hayes. that the election was Ia no
sense free and fair ono.
Bradley advanced the broad and mon
strous proposition that even II tho whole
army of the United States had been em-
ployed, the Commission could not hear
evidence OF the faet or consider 1t.
Abbott thereupon caustioally inquired
II he meant to hold that II President,
wanting third term, should use the
whole army to carry u needed State, the
fact could not be inquired into or con.
sideredp
It was poser for Bradley. He just
stuck doggedly to his original PROPOSE.
ton. Then he essayed to treat with
contempt the objection to the form OF
titicate. which objection was that tho
certificate merely reoited that the Elee-
toral College Of South Carolina had
voted for Hayes and Wheeler. without
Fspeeifying that the said vote was by
ballot, or how the vote stood. Bradley
remarked that It was to be presumed
that the requirements OF the constita.
ton had been complied with; the case
did not, he thought, admit of any argu-
ment at all.
This excited Abbott's indignation, and
| when he rose to reply he began by re-
marking that he did not propose TO be
denied his right to discuss tho question
| by Bradley very ill-considered remark.
He thereupon proceeded to discuss very
vigorously, very aarcastieally and very
eloquently Bradley's assumption.
For his part, he said, judging by what
he knew OF tho methods Of the Repub-
lioan party In South Carolina, and what
he knew OF some of the men who COM
posed the Electoral College, the pre-
sumption was decidedly that they had
paid no attention to the constitution at
all. He doubted. In fact, very much, II
some of them had ever read any CT that
instrument.
Bradley wriggled about and looked
very uncomfortable under Abbott's plain
words, but of course stuck to his vote.
Bayard and Herman then spoke briefly,
and Morton closed with his usual parti-
san harangue.
Some difficulty was experienced In
concocting a report which would fit even
| the elastic consclences Of the subservi-
ent eight, but at last Miller began to
read an elaborate argument which pur-
ported to be such report.
Payne blandly suggested that Justice
Miller was arguing the case rather than
giving concise reasons for the vote.
Miller replied tartly that he did not
know that 1t made much difference to
him (Payne) whether the report was
long or short, as he wouldn't probably
vote for 1t any way.
Payne quickly retorted that he most
oertainlv would not. as he proposed 1 q
wash his hands of all this villainy and
infamy which the majority were doing.
Payne put In parting shot by remark.
ing to Edmunds, as Miller had made
the only argument which the Repub-
licans had offered on the case, that the
Hayes managers, IL they had set aside
any amount for counsel fees in this
case, they ought, in justice, to pay the
fee to Miller rather than to counsel.
BUELL..