The Louisiana Democrat. [volume] (Alexandria, La.) 1845-1918, 1878-05-01
THE PLAINTIFF, MARYLAND +!

"hiSh Shc piopbSeS TO DPInO against
Rutherford B. Hayes and William A,
Wheeler, charging that they obtain.
ed possession of the offices of Presi
dent and Vice President by the
COUNT IF fraudulent votes, purportino
10 be the votes Of the States of Lou
lsiana and Florida, instead of the
true votes Of those States, which
were cast for Tilden and Hendricks;
that the effect was to nulify and
render imperative the vote of Mary
land, whereby Til.len and Hendricks
had been elected, and to elect HAYES
and Wheeler. On this statement
Maryland has undoubtedly been de-
frauded, and is deprived of a legal
right held by the State under the
Constitution and laws of the United
States; and moreover the right is of
a character which courts habitually
uphold and enforce, and the State
being entitled to have it's rights,
when denied or withheld by citizens
OF other States, enforced in original
actions in the Supreme Court of the
United States, there can be,no doubt
of the right Of the State to bring
such suit against Hayes and Vince
Ter. 1t is not denied, indeed, 80 far
as we have seen, that such an action
is maintainahle. Judge Black saws
in a published letter, that the ablest
lawyers in the land concur in this
opinion, and it is difficult to see how
there could be difference of opinion
on so plain proposition. But leg
islation is nevertheless necessary to
regulate and expedite the proceed
ing and prevent the defeat of the
right of the State by delay and the
expiration Of the incumbent's term
of office before the action can be
brought to trial.
Moreover, the electoral bill itself
expressly reserves the right to sub
ject the votes now challenged by
Maryland to judicial scrutiny. The
object of inserting this reservation
was to prevent its operating to give
that immunity to fraud in any event
which Senator Dennis now seeks to
make it confer, in disregard alike of
the bill itself and of his obligations
to his constituents. What, however,
is most remarkable about it is that
while disregarding the plain terms
of the bill re processes to be acting
against his feelings in carrying it
ont. and that, having voted for the
electoral bill, he feels constrained in
good faith to stand by the decision
of the commission, when, by the term
of the bill itself, he is obliged to
stand by that decision only until
judicial decision can be had, so that
if he was really acting in good faith
to the bill he could not fail to see
that it was his duty to do all in his
power to procure a judicial decision
at the earliest moment. We might
suppose that the Senator was honest
in his profession of acting in good
faith whilst so clearly violating it, if
he was not even more disingeuous in
the second ground upon which he
disregards the will of his constitu
ents; that is, that the judicial pro-
ceeding they propose is likely to lead
to disturbance Of the peace of the
country! Having said this, he adds:
mo man within the confines Of ms
State desires to witness a renewal of
such scenes as have been enacted
within the last fourteen or fifteen
years. No one desires to see broth
ers welterng in brothers blood"
etc, etc.
No one, after witnessing the &C.
quiescence in the decision of the
Electoral Commission, can suppose
that decision of the Supreme Court
would not be also accepted by all
with at least equal respect. Hence
it is plain that Senator Dennis
stoops to false pretense when he re-
fuses to carry out the will of the
Legislature to prevent "brothers well
tering in brothers blood" This Ian
yuage is not only insulting to the in
,elIigence of the people. but it is IL
oelous upon the Southern people, tor
whom the Senator has expressed
'ympathy; for the late civil war was
lot, as he implies, made by them to
make one man President instead OF
And it is false, also, in an.
'ther respect; for, so far from there
,eing any disposition on the part of
he South, as it implies, to renew
f.; e. rF;ll,o