Morning journal and courier., 1880-12-10

HoUsE.-Mr. Baker, from the Committee on Appropriations, reported the forti6cation appropriation bill and it was ordered printed and recommitted. It appropriates $100, 900 for the protection and repair of Notifications, $40O, 900 for the armament, etc., of fortifica- tions and $50, 900 for the purchase of torpe- does.
 The House then resumed consideration of the Senate concurrent resolution relative to the electoral count. MT. McLane, after read ing the twelfth article of the Constitution, said 1t gave an express grant to both houses of Congress to count the votes. He doubt ed whether many men on the other side would take the position of Mir. Robeson, that the power to count the votes is vested in the Vice President by the Constitution that the theory has never been seriously accepted in the history of the country. Nor could the theory be &C., cepted that Congress could constitute a tri- bunal to count and declare the result of the electoral votes for President and Vice Presi- dent. Congress did once by law establish tribunal, and the count made under it would stand as a monument of disgrace. That tri- bunal, McLane argued, was established after pressure because the country had an Execu- tive who proposed to use the army and navy even to defeat the will of the people. It was under such a pressure that the gentlemen agreed to pass that law. But nearly all men of any distinction expressed
 
 for such law establishing such an exception al President, and authorized another body to perform a duty which devolved on the two houses of Congress. As 8 proof that the authority of the two houses of Congress to count the votes had been heretofore recog- nized, MT. McLane referred to the fact that MT. Lincoln in message to Congress remon- strated against being called upon to share the responsibility of declaring the result of the presidential election. That message was one of the acts which the gentleman from New Jersey would like to wipe out. MT. McLane then made long argument to show that un- der article 12 of the Constitution the two houses counted the vote
 A long and tedious discussion ensued as to the operation of the proposed joint rule ip reference to its action on the vote of States, the Republicans contending that under the proposed rule one house really determined the result in each State while the Democrats argued that 1t required the concurrent action of both houses to receive or reject a vote, and that they regarded it the fairest solu- ton of the question. MT. Lapham, fNew York, expressed the belief that the Democrats had some ulterior object or they would not press this matter with such pertinacity. He gave notice that he would resort to all parliament ary expedients to defeat it. He einsisted upon the right of the Vice President to- count the vote claiming that no Vice President would ever defeat the will of the people. He did not regard it as possible to count fraudu- lent vote. In the course of his remarks he referred to the quotation by the Democrats of Mir. Lincolns message on this subject, and intimated that they had no right to quote MT. Lincoln, as they had regarded him as a mere rail splitter.
 Mir. Herbert, of Alabama, in reply denied that there was the least occasion to impute ulterior or bad objects to the Dem ocrats. He admitted the election of General Garfield, but said the Democrats wanted to establish the fact that the Vice President should not count the vote. Referring to MT. Lapham's re- mark about MT. Lineoln's message, he claimed that no section of the country had more re- spect for Mr. Lincoln's memory than the South, and they regsrded his assassination as one of the greatest evils that could have be- fallen that section.
 MT. Newbury, of Michigan, closed the days debate, arguing in favor of the right of the Vice President to count the vote, and at the close of his speech the House adjourned.