The Weston Democrat. [volume] (Weston, W. Va.) 1875-current, 1880-12-18

The resolution adopted by the
Republican caucus to oppose by
alliparliamentary means the pms.
sage ofthe proposed joint rule al
readyzpassed. blythe Senate. forEthe
counting ofthey electoralIyotes
February, and the speeches Of
Messrs.R obesonEand DeLand.in
the House Of Representatives, suf.
ficiently=illustrate the antagonistic
position Of the two parties in Con-
gross in reference to the subject.
In regard 10 the constitutional
method Of counting the votes they.
are as wide apart apparently as in
1877. And since that time moth
ing has been done to prevent the
possible recurrence Of a similar
controversy. Another presidential
election has been held and the cleo
tors have assembled in their re-
spective States, as required by the
constitution, and cast their votes,
and there is no doubt about the
result. Nevertheless, the question
Of receiving and counting the
votes, by whom they arc to be
counted, and the result ascertained,
and what are tho elective powers
and duties of the President of the
Senate and of the two houses joint
ly or scverally, remain open to de-
bate, just as It no electoral commits
sion had ever been found necessa-
ry, or decision made by a strict
party vote Of eight to seven, that
the votes must be counted as GER
titled and that no evidence aiiuade
Gun be received 10 impeach the
certificates or the qualifications of
an elcctor. The Republicans gen
orally contend that the Vice resi-
dent, whose duty it is to open the
certificates, is the proper person to
count the votes and announce the
result, and that the two houses
merely meet as ,citnesses to the
transaction, without any power to
act in the premises. 10 this Dem-
oerats reply that no such extraor-
binary powers are conferred by the
constitution upon the presiding
officer Of the Senate; that the two
houses do not meet us witnesses
simply Of the opening of the GER
tificates which takes place in their
presence, and that the very contin-
gency that, in case Of a failure Of
the electors 10 elect, the House,
voting by States, is to elect the
President, necessarily implies tho
right and power Of the House to
judge for itself whether or not such
Il contingency has arisen. Mr..
Robson, who stated the Republic
can view teinperately and with
moderation, was explicit in the
declaration that lie attributed no
more Judicial power to the Prcsi-
dent Of the Senate, in counting the
votes, than 10 the two Houses, and
tlat the counting was n purely |
ministerial act and not Il judicial |
one. The answer, of course, 10 this
view was the obvious ono that
while unilerthis construction Of the
Constitution there would be no dill
Guilty so long MS there is no dispute
rs to tho result Of tile election i'll
my particular State, or only one
received certificate from each State,
that ii utterly fails to meet the
very class OF cases in which the
need Of n rule and Of a judicial do
termination would DO inperatively
Ielt. If there arc Two certificates,
u what purport'to be two, from the
,,llnc State, both cannot be count
ii, mud in counting one and TO-
ectins The other the President of
he Senate must necessarily act ju-
licially, and not ministcrially. Al
dill broader view Of the case is That
!, fraudulent vote Or certificate