The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1878-06-02
POTTER'S RESOLUTION.
wR. POTTER EXPLAINS WHAT HE
MEANT III HIS INvEsTIGATION
REGULATION.
a We're Investigation Of Election Frauds
The ImpOssibiIity Of Revolution or
Disturbances of ANY Kind.

WASHINGTON, May 27.-Clarkson N. Potter
I'm n long letter to New York friend explains
Ihe effect Of his resolution He says:
"WAsHrNGToN, May u. 1878.
l',lfy Dear Sri have your letter Of the
twenty-hfth. ] agree with you in Wishing
Congress would adjourn. am enc OF those
who think the world Is governed too much
I should be glad to see the power OF Congress
over matters of private and special legisla-
ton entirely cut off. And since much Of the
public legislation proposed dtSturbS business
and unsettles industry, / have thought IL
might be well II Congress, unless convened
by the President, met but every other year,
as is the case with the Legislatures IN some
of the States. / proposed an amendment To
the constitution providing for BIENNIAL Sos,
sions Of Congress, but 1t has not been receives
with any favor. Other sections OF the COun-
try do not feel as we do about this, and want
currency or subsidy, or other legislation.
"You ask me
why MIR. STEPHENS WAS 'HOWbEn' DOWN
The bowling was by the newspapers To in
tsrrupt the pending order OF business by n
motion or n statement requires unanimous
consent and every member has the absolute
right to object to the interruption. This OBJ
lection s expressed by the words ! object, or
a demand for the regular order Sometimes
one person will prevent the interruption;
sometimes the desire to prevent II Is general
and then the cry OF regular order Will be
from many persons. 1t so happened That
there was q very general unwillngness to
hear Mr.. Stephens. He had suggested that
we should receive and adopt the Hale amend
ment 1t was reported that he he'd given the
Republicans q list of twenty-five names who
would follow him In any motion Of his to pre-
vent investigation. About this he was gross
ly mistaken, and this made our side especial
Iy unwilling to hear him, But you will OBJ
serve that when rose to make q proposition
to Mr. Hale, and the Republican cutlery pre-
vented my being heard, 1t was announced by
the press that Mr.. Potter's inquiry was In
corrupted while Mr.; Stephens was head,
lined as the venerable statesman hOWled
down by Potter's mob
''You ask me why we would not let
THE HALE AMENDMENT
me attached to our resolution 2 Because 1t
was not germane An inquiry into frauds &C
oomplished, and which changed the electoral
vote. Ii proper to prevent their repetition,
but an inquiry into mere attempts at fraud
which resulted In nothing Is not 1. Because
we understood 1t contained recital5 TO which
wercouId not assent and which would have
forced us to vote against our own resolution.
q Because we offered Mr.. Hale every oppor-
tunity to have his amendment adopted as q
separate resolution. That 1t was not so Of
Tered shows 1t was really not desired. 3. Be
cause its incorporation into the resolution
might have had the effect Of preventing any
report upon the resolution, As it Is the com
rntttee will have probably butone opportunity
ment could, IL 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.
''You suggest that to raise q question
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 rovo
luton or disturbance. When the whole COun-
try was at fever heat on the subject OF the
election way was found TO establish
tribunal to pass upon the election, and
every one submitted to that determination.
The Presidents title rests upon that. II
now 1t should appear that there was
fraud which palpably affected the electoral
vote. and which the commission did
correcting the error, you cannot believe that
such proceeding under the law could lead to
disturbance, II there be no such legal remedy
existing, and Congress should here
or by two-thirds of both houses with
out that approval, provide one, why
should legal determination thereafter had,
any more produce disturbance than the deCi-
sion Of the Electoral Commission did, 1t Is
exactly because this is not Mexico, and be-
cause the people prefer determining ques-
tions by legal methods, and If legal methods
have not been provided, to invent legal meth
DDS of determining them and to submit to the
determination thus arrived at-that this
country cannot be Mexicanized.
about the enumeration of electoral votes
there could be no question. Eight and eight
only could be counted as sixteen. Neither
could there be question that the conceded
vote of every State should be counted. To
refuse that would be revolutionary But
when there were two bona file returns from
u State, each claimed to be It's vote, it was a
necessity to decide between these returns be-
tb,nr., nI,t,, In fa1 do
termination could only be made by the Vice
President who opened the returns, or by the
Congress In whose presence they were opened.
i thought 1t clear from the nature Of our
government, from the presidents, and from
the opinions so many statesmen had ex-
pressed, that this grave power, upon which
the last election did, and upon which any
election might depend, could only be vested
in Congress. II this power rested in Con
gress alone, then
THE ACTION OF CONGRESS
was necessary before choice could be made
between conflicting returns; and So when
ever the two houses Of Congress could not
agree in their choice of a return-one house
preferring one, and the other the Other-nO
choice could be had, and the vote of that State
would be lost. Not because one house had
any greater right or powers than the other
not because either, or both houses together
had the right to reject arbitrarily, or to refuse
to reckon any certain electoral vote, but only
DeCduS5 III CdSi vi UUHb ituC CpIilitJllIS IT.
turns from State, each claiming TO represent
its electoral vote, it was necessity to choose
between the returns before the vote Of the
State could be counted. This was the view at
last established. For the Electoral Commits
sion to decide the disputed votes was created
nv Congress, and that was the only authority
it possessed,
NOW, 1t seemed to me In 1876 that this was
so clear, and that the leading Republican Sen
atorS had so generally committed themselves
to this view in previous discussions, that we
ought to stand upon that ground; to declare
that we would abide the action Of Congress,
would accept whomever the Congress found
to be elected, and that it the two houses should
tail to agree as to which Of the returns from
any State from which there were bona .fde
duplicate returns should be received whereby
the vote of the State was lost, and no election
by the electors should thus result, we would
then abide and maintain the choice Of the
House of Representatives, the body author
lied by the constitution to elect the President
where there Is no election by the Electoral
College. Instead of doing this we drifted
along until at last the Republicans hewing