The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1878-06-13
MIR. POTTER'S COMMITTEE.


MIR. POTTER's COMMITTEE.
his Letter to a Northern Friend About the
Frauds Investigation-The Cry of ''Revo-
luton" Only Republican Pretense for
Partisan Purposes.
Hon. Clarkson N. Potter has been ap-
pealed to so generally by letter and by
representatives of the press to express
his views as to the investigation into the
Presidential election frauds that be de-
cided to make public a private letter
which he wrote in reply to one from a
clergyman in New York, and which
covers very fully the inquiries addressed
to him, not only from that but other
quarters. Mr.. Potter shows very conclu-
sively that the cry of revolution" which
the Republicans have aet up over this
investigation is simply the cry of wolf
when there is no wolf, and is repetition
of the bloody shirt business. The letter
is as follows:
WASHINGTON, May 27, 1878.
My DEAR SIR: I have your letter of
the 25th. agree with you in wishing
Congress would adjourn. 1 am one Of
those who think the world is governed
too much. 1 should be glad to see the
power of Congress over matters of private
and special legislation entirely cut of.
And since much of the public legislation
proposed disturbs business and unsettles
industry, have thought it might be well
if Congress, unless convened by the
President, met but every other year, as
is the case with the Legislatures in some
of the States. I accordingly proposed
an amendment to the constitution pro-
viding for biennial sessions of Congress,
but it has not been received with any
favor. Other sections of the country do
not feel as we do about this, and want
currency or subsidy or other legislation.
You ask me why Mr.. Stephens YVES
"howled" down, The "howling" was by
the newspapers. To interrupt the pend
ing order of business by motion or a
statement requires unanimous consent,
and every member has the absolute right
to object to the interruption. This OBJ
lection is expressed by the words, II
object" or demand for "the regular
order" Sometimes one person will pre-
vent the interruption, sometimes the de-
sire to prevent it is general, and then the
cry of regular order" will be from many
persons. 1t so happened that there was
q very general unwillingness to hear Mr..
Stephens. He had suggested that we
should receive and adopt the Hale
amendment. It was reported that he
has given the Republicans list Of
twenty-five names who would follow him
in any motion of his to prevent investi-
cation. About this he was'grossly mis-
taken, and this made our side especially
unwilling to hear him. But you will
observe that when I rose to make prop
osition to Mr.. Hale, and the Republican
outcry prevented my being heard, it was
announced by the press that "Mr. Pot
ter's inquiry was interrupted" while Mr..
Stephens was head-lined as "the venera-
BILE statesman howled down by Potter's
mob" You ask me why we would not
let the Hale amendment be attached to
our resolution. Because it was not ger
name. An inquiry into frauds accom-
plished, and which changed the electoral
vote, is proper, to prevent their repeti-
ton, but an inquiry into mere attempts
at fraud which resulted in nothing is not.
First, because we understood it contained
recitals to which we could not assent,
and which would have forced US to vote
against our own resolution; second, be-
cause we offered Mr.. Hale every oppor-
tunity to have his amendment adopted
as a separate resolution. That it was not
so offered shows it was really not desired.
Third, because its incorporation into the
resolution might have had the effect of
preventing any report upon the resolu-
ton. AS it is, the committee will have
probably but one opportunity to report
in this Congress, and this amendment
could, if added to the resolution, be made
to prevent the report at that time, and
thus to deprive US of an opportunity to
report at all. Just as we got ready to
report, we should be liable to be stopped
to take further testimony in some of the
added States brought forward for the
very purpose of preventing report.
But you suggest that to raise q ques-
ton about the last Presidential election
will bring on disturbance or revolution.
Not at all. About that possess yourself
in peace" There is not the slightest
chance of revolution or disturbance.
When the whole country was at fever
heat on the subject Of the election way
was found to establish tribunal to pass
upon the election, and every one submit.
ted to that determination. The Presi.
dents title rests upon that. If now il
should appear that there was fraud which
palpably affected the electoral vote and
which the commission did not notice,
and if legal remedy exists for correct.
ing the error, you cannot believe that
such proceeding under the law could
lead to disturbance. If there be no such
legal remedy existing, and Congress
should hereafter, by the approval of the
President, or by two-thirds of both
Houses without that approval, provide
one, why should the legal determination
thereafter had any more produce distur.
bance than the decision of the electoral
commission did? Is it exactly because
this is not Mexico, and because the peo.
pie prefer determining questions by legaI
methods, and if the legal methods have
not been provided to invent legal meth
ods of determining them and submit te
the determination thus arrived at, thai
this country cannot be Mexicanized
About the enumeration of electoral vote:
there could be no question. Eight anc
eight could only be counted as sixteen
| Neither could there be question that the
conceded vote of every State should be
counted. TO refuse that would be revo
lutionary. But when there were two
bona fde returns from State, each
claimed to be its vote, it was necessity
to decide between these returns before
either return could be counted. This
determination could only be made by
the Vice President, who opened the re
turns, or by the Congress in whose pres
ence they were opened. 1 thought i
clear from the nature of our government
from the precedents, and from the opin
ions so many statesmen had expressed