Perrysburg journal. (Perrysburg, Wood Co., O. [Ohio]) 186?-1965, 1877-02-16
THE ELECTORAL COMMISSION.

THE ELECTORAL COMMISSION.
$500 WASHINGTON, Feb T.
The Electoral Commission commenced
its session at ten O'clock and continued un,
til four. The following is their decision, as
shown by the official record: On motion of
Justice Miller, it was ordered that no evi.
dence will be received or considered by the
commission which was not submitted to
the joint convention of the two houses
by the President of the Senate, with the
different certificates, except such as re-
lates to the eligibility of Humphrey as
an elector. The vote stood: Yeas-Brad-
ley, Edmunds, Frelinghuysen, Garfield,
Hoar, Miller, Morton and Strong g.
Nays-Abbott, Bayard, Clifford, Field,
Hunton, Payne and Thurman--7.
On motion of Mr.. Abbott, it was re.
solved that in the case of Florida this
commission will receive evidence relat.
ing to the eligibility of Frederick Hum
phrey, one of the persons named in certi.
ficate No. as an elector: Yeas-Abbott,
Bayard, Bradley, Clifford, Field, Hunton,
Payne and Thurman-S. NAYS Ed
munds, Frelinghuysen, Garfield, Hoar,
Miller, Morton and Strong-7
The Secretary of the commission was
instructed to inform the counsel on the
respective sides that on the Sth it would
hear argument on the question of the
eligibility of Frederick G. Humphrey as
an elector. Humphrey is one of the
| Republican electors, and the question
raised as to his eligibility is that he was
at the date of his election United
States Shipping Commissioner, which is
alleged to be such an office of trust or
profit as to disqualify him from acting
as an elector, but which Office, it is as.
serted by the Republicans, he resigned
before the election. .
The commission, by their decision to-
day, will have before them in the Florida
case three sets of papers, namely: First,
the certificate of the Hayes electors; sec-
ond, that of the Tilden electors, and
third, the paper containing the record of
the Circuit Court of Florida on the quo
toGrrdnto, and subsequent action of the
Legislature of that State.
WASHINGTON, Feb. 8.
The commission reassembled in open
session at eleven o'clock, and Justice
Clifford stated that proceedings were now
in order under the orders adopted by the
commission yesterday. s..l ....-f
MIR. F. G. Humphreys having been
identified, Counsel Green presented the
commission of Humphreys and certifi-
cate from the Clerk of the Court in which
the commission was filed that no resigna.
tion had been filed up to Jan. "a, 1877, ~
Humphreys testified that he resigned
the office of U. s, Shipping Commissioner
and his resignation was accepted Oct. s
by Judge Wood, from whom the Office
came. Witness produced the written ac.
ceptance of his resignation.
Mr.. Merrick objected TO the produc-
tion of the paper, as it was the act of an
individual and not an act of the court.
Mr.. Stoughten-The paper was re-
ceived from Judge Wood in answer to his
resignation. -rHfs su
The letter was read, and stated that
the resignation was accepted, and that
until he (Judge Wood) would come to
Pensacola and hold court the duties
would be discharged by the Collector of
the Port.
The introduction of letter from Pot.
ter, Collector of Customs, dated Oct. 5,
1875, asking the witness to turn over the
books and papers of his office, was OBJ
jected to by Merrick.
Witness stated that he did turn over
the office and had not exercised the
functions of the Office since.
CrOss-eIGmined THE letter was ad-
dressed to Judge Wood at Newark, Ohio,
and the reply came from there; there had
been no session of the court at Pensacola
since that time.
The testimony here closed, and Justice |
Clifford announced that the whole case
was now ready for argument. f1i
Judge Hoadley, for the Democrats.
contended that the tender of his resigna-
ton to the Governor in Ohio and the &C
ceptsnce of the same by Judge in Ohio |
was not an act of the Circuit Court of |
Florida, and that, therefore, the resigna- |
tion of Humphreys had not been legally |
accepted, and he was consequently at |
this time holding an Office of profit and |
trust under the United States, and, |
therefore was ineligible as an elector.
lhe acts of Congress indicated dis
position to furnish remedy where dis
qualified electors had been chosen. The |
state having failed to take advantage of |
the l34th section of the Revised Statutes
having failed to remedy the non elec.
tion-there was vacancy, and one vote
was, he claimed, lost to the State. e st
Mr.. Green, Of the same side, argued
that the formal character of certificate
NO. entitled it to consideration by the
commission, and contended that the
statutes and action of the courts of the
State were matters that the commission
should inquire into to establish the illegal
ity of certificate No. 1. The commits
sion had before them, in the third GER
tifeate, not only the certificate of the
Governor, but tabular statement of the
precise number of votes cast in each
county of the State for the different
candidates. This certificate had the
authority of the Executive, Judiciary
and Legislature, all speaking in unani.
nous and united voice. He contended
that laws passed by the Legislature of
Florida since Jan. /, in relation to the
recent election, were not er post facto
laws within the meaning of the Con-
q Mr.. Shellabarger followed on the other
side. He submitted the proposition that
all acts in relation to the accomplish.
ment of certain act must anticipate the
act itself, and on this proposition every
act that followed the electoral vote was
excluded. He contended that the power
Of State was limited to appointment,
and that no act pertaining to the APP
pointment could be had after the ap-
pointment had been made and the Office /.
had passed away He conceded that 1t
was in the power of the State to try by :
her own machinery the power of her !
Electors, but the scrutiny must be made
prior to the discharge of the functions
)f office Machinery m contaat an alac
ion after the Office had passed away
would, he said; be an absurdity. -
MIR. Evarts closed the argument on the
Republican side. He argued that the !
evidence in regard to Humphreys holding !
'ffice fell short of showing that he was
n office at the time of casting the 2
electoral vote, and that the burden of /
proof rested on the side making the OBJ.
ection, The authorities, he said, were I
Hear as TO the right of a citizen resign J.
4. |