The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1879-03-04


stenrns, the Republican candidate for Governor.
But none the less, II remains that accorlingt to
the faco OF tho returns the Tildcn electors were
duly chosen in the State OF Florida. and should
1t was claimed that IL tho cnnvassers must
count by the face OF the returns. they were
returns from Baker County. because it was
signed by The judge. Justice, and the Sheriff.
while tho full return was only sgnnd by clerk
and Justice. But the Sheriff hnd no power to
act .except when the clerk or Judge did not.
And us the returns showed that both the clpr'i
and Judge had ncted they furnished the Bnnrl
the evidence on their face that the contingency
in which alone the sheriff was authorized to act
nullity. The Board had. therefore before II
two returns. each signed by two authorized
officers only. one returning the vote Of but two
precinrts the other returning the vote Of all the
precincts in the county and explaining the no,
sence sen %, ,ne rrn d Sein,,nr w1a ro rompte
the Drigger return only an Incomplete and
partial return; and one. under the clrcum.
stances disclosed by the returns. suggestive OF
fraud
Dad FAITH OF THE STATE oANvAssERs
The conduct Of the two Republican State can
vassers subsequent to this can vass shows their
| the Supreme Court requiring tho recanvass OF
| the vote for Governor. they volunteered to re-
with its decision In the cnse Of the vote for Gov
| ernor-that is nccordingto the true returns be-
J fore them. As doing this would give mnJor-
| ity to tho Tilden electors when they came TO
! Baker County they took tho return DrigRers had
] Manufactured. containing but Two preclncts OF
that county, and thereby made tho result seem
70 be upon the face OF the returns for Hayes.
But as between the double returns from this
county II was within their province to decide.
and ms thtS had the facts and the precinct re-
turns before them, and had previously deter;
| mined that the Driggers return WINS partial and
| false. their adopting II on this canvass under
the false prctcnce OF obedience To the court. was
| another fraudulent act in violation Of right and
law. To make it falsely appear that the State had
| gone for Hayes. Especially clenr is this. as in
| both their canvasses OF the GoNernorE vote
| i'm daH tha mr. ef Of Hnk
Howell nm employee in the clerks office OF
| Baker County claimed the credit Of causing the
| Driggers canvass, and insisted that II WIS he
| that had secured MIR. Hayess election. ns the
pretext for counting II for Hayes; and he was
rewarded for his ingenious device bv being
made United States Collector OF the port OF Fer
TIM ACCURACY OF THE PRECINCT RETURNS.
An application was made to your Committee
70 showthat the precinct returns in the state OF
| Florida e.. I not correspond with the votes ac-
tually Offered, That evidence we declined to
receive. 4, inquiry Is 70 whether the local
properly received or rejected any votes would
BE- neither profitable nor practicable such an IN
what took place before them but rs to the resi-
dence natural lization. or other fitness. as well OF
whose votes were received. and might be SO con-
Quoted as TO extend 70 every man in tho State.
and Is completion thus be made absolutely inn
Beyond this the lave Of the State Of Florida do
not coniem plate such m inquiry. The laws re-
| quire the precinct on 'ers to count tho votes
cast 81 far rs they tally with the poll list. and
! return the SAME 10 tho county officers. who are
! 10 coninile md forward the votes thus returned
them by the precinct officers ot the Bourd Of
State Cnnvassers: and the State hns " thheld
from them any other authority When the pre-
| cinct officers and the county officers and tho
State officers had exercised these powers and
the only authority vested in them. the result
showed that the State had east its vote for Til
dem Thn; vote had been ascertained by the
means provided by law, and an Inquiry into the
purpose or wishes OF the indiy,dun voters
would have been alike impraricable and with
In view Of the control which the Republican
State officials exercised over the election and
returns throughout the State. md their deter
minaton to use every possible influence. power
mud opportunity to have the State counted fol
the Republicans. II IL quite certain That no in
Justice could. on the whole, have been done tC
! But had il been Otherwise II yas not within th'
authority OF Congress to correct the evil. mol
within lis powers efficiently to Investigate Il
and wc therefore decided not 10 ent'r upon M
. inquiry such rs the state had not provided for
I which could not bee brought 10 any conclusion
within the term of this Congress. and whict
Z could result IN no fact important Tor ths deter
= minauon oi the real questions involved in th'
Z | Investigation.
! THE DECISION OF THE ELECTORAL COMMISSION
AZ is we'll known the Electoral Com mission ny
i strict party vote refused to inquire into irauC
in the appointment of electors and refused e
receive evidence thereof or 10 inquire into thei
title, and roiused also 20 recognize the vote cas-
o by tho electors appointed in accordance with
1 ! lNt AhuHtNul''H anu lllN ltNH fl fNTilNs kui
! which uuou the completion of the cunvHss 81
/, | recied hy the Legislature. and conducted IL
y the supreme Court lad been verified ms th'
4 only real appo ntment by Florida. They per
o. sisted IN counting instead tie vote given by th'
5 usurping electors on the 9th OF December io
Hayes and Wheeler. which is the foundation o
their ttl".
And yet, MS has been stated there Is renlly n,
II question or dispute about what dill occur II
Y the State u Floriln, and II Is evident from nj
y the prorreliu..s in that State that according L
y Z a return nul canvass of tut4 votes -
J.. majority of the votes Of that state wrte cnst lo
r Ilden and Hendricks. and not for Hayes an'
Nor an it he doubted, from review Of tn,
und suutrd facts, that tho action of the State au
q and Wheeler wns M Intentional wrong. fraud
e. ulrnty and knowingly carried out under tn
encouragement OF the visiting statesmen.
>. THE DANGER FROM THAT DECISION
v Such a wrong may be repeated in any State a
o. any Presidential election. and the ElectoTn
). Commission has decided that i Il M be not cor
!; oi December following the election. il cannot
= under existing laws. be corrected at all. an
10 that the vote OF the usurping electors must b
r This We think an erroneous. unjust and dan
70 gerous determination.
r The eNrrcis" OF choice by one entitled to SUI
J. frage cannot b" said 70 be complete until nj
: vote is finally deposited. II a man were 10 M
a pronch poll. and offer to vote by hand ng up
~ ballot. and his vote should be challenged. an
e l" shoul ho subjected 10 qu 'stion. and inall
- bee required TO swear in his vote. and tho bdllo
n ho trIdcrod should he passed W from the Ofll
% Ger who received il 10 one who compared II wit
e the registry. and from him To- on, who admin
a lstrred the OATH ana conducted the eNhuinn
a tnn Hni finally 10 that oilicrr who was to dc
h post in the ballot box, AMI at the last momcn
20 the hitter should remark To tho voter: | nutic
% YOU vote Tor y, and the voter should reply
e NJ; that rs u mistukH, | hat n wrong hlilC
y XIV" me back thW haliot;' every on' would 81
n that the correction WHs in time. and that IN
IS voter would hay" tne, rient t. recall tho hnll,
q which he had mistakenly phss"d up. just Is,
n II seems 10 US. thtt whcn. Us IN" iraudul mt an