The Louisiana Democrat. [volume] (Alexandria, La.) 1845-1918, 1886-07-14
1T YET RANKLEs
The Outrage of 1915 by Which Fraud
Triumphed-General Hancock's Manly,
Patriotic, Statesmanlike Attitude.

The Outrage of 1870 by Which Fraud
Triumphed-GeneralH ancock's Manly,
Patriotic, Statesmanlike Attitude.
At recent meeting of the Military
Service Institution, held to honor the
memory OF Winfield Scott Hancock,
there were read or spoken great
many interesting letters and addresses
from persons of weight and eminence
in civil and military life. But none of
these tributes bears such impressive
and enduring witness to the virtues Of
the dead, or establishes SO strong a
title to the national respect and graft
tude, as letter sent by Hancock him
self to General Sherman in December,
1876. Here the writer sets forth, mod
estly but firmly, his conception of the
duty of the army, and especially of Of
ficers intrusted with high command,
in the event OF grave connections
being excited by a failure of the SEN
ate and House of Representatives to
agree in declaring the result of the
Presidential election. In Hancock the
country lost soldier who was first of
all patriot, soldier who would have
let no fiction of Difference to military
orders supersede his fundamental oath
to obey the constitution, and who, in
such conflict of technical and real
obligations, would have stood forth
bulwark, and not a betrayer, of our
liberties.
What were the rights and duties of
the House of Representatives in the
event of the Senate's refusing to con-
cur in pronouncing Mr.. Tilden the
choice Of majority for President, is
now plain enough to all men Of sound
brains and honest hearts. By General
Hancock they were recognized with
unerring exactitude in December,
1876, and in his letter to Sherman they
are incidentally defined with rare sim
plicity and cogency. eff" he writes,
''the Senate and House, on the occa-
sion of the count, do not unite IN de-
claring some person legally elected by
the people, there is lawful machinery
already provided to meet the contin-
gency and to decide the question
peacefully. 1t has not been recently
used, no occasion presenting, but, our
forefathers provided it. 1t has been
exercised, and has been recognized as
lawful on every hand. That machinery
would probably elect Mr. Tilden
President and Mr.. Wheeler Vice-Presi-
dent {i
General Hancock proceeds to make
more unmistakable, his meaning,
which is that, should the House of Rep
resentatives, as he plainly thinks it
ought to do, pronounce it irreconcila-
| BILE with its conscience to bestow on
Mr.. Hayes the electoral votes of the
| three States of South Carolina, Florida
and Louisiana, or the votes of any one
of them, then there would be no cleo
ton by the people, no candidate hav-
ing majority of the Electoral College,
and the right to choose President
would by the constitution devolve upon
the House. "Some tribunal," says Han
cock, "must decide whether the people
have duly elected a President. l pre-
sumo, of course, that it is the joint af-
tirmative action of the Senate and
House, or why are they present to wit
ness the count, if not to see that it is
fair and just? If failure to agree
arises between the two bodies, there can
be no lawful affirmative decision that
the people have elected President
and the House must then proceed to
act, not the Senate. The Senate elects
Presidents, not Presidents"
No wonder that Secretary Bayard
who had read these imperishable words
should have commented upon them il
letter read before the Military Service
Institution in terms that reflect honor
at once upon Hancock and himself. g
take leave here to say" writes Mr.
Bayard, "that no wiser, ADLER or more
patriotic deliverance, fo soundcr con
ception of constitutional duty ant
function, or solution based more sol
idly upon law and justice, can be fount
in the history of that period than il
contained in the letter of General Han
,ock to General Sherman"
But there is something else deduc
ible from the frank and pregnant tex
of Hancock's communication. From
j his conception of the powers and obi
cations of the House of Representative
in the crisis then at hand there wer
for him, as being an officer in hig
command, certain practical corollarie
of the utmost gravity and moment
From these Hancock did not finch
! Whom was he, Hancock, to obey in tn
I event of the nonagreement of the Sen
ate and House, and consequent mis-
, carriage of the election by the people
, From whom was he to take orders o
J March 4, 1877, providing the House {
Representatives had not yet discharge
J its function of naming an occupan
] for the Presidential office? He bluntl
? tells General Sherman that in his jude
! ment General Grants term of offic
: would cease with the expiration {
, March 8, and it followed that not fc
, an hour afterward would Hancock hav
I taken orders from Grant in the c,
9 pacity of President and Commander-il
6 Chief. He did not doubt that Gener;
: Sherman's authority, such IS it wa
: would continue, and he acknowledge
= that the President of the Senate woul
: be on March ''the legitimate perso
e to exercise Presidential authority fl
j. the time being, until the appearance
II lawful President"
: These admissions are qualified |
the firm notification that neither in tt
President of the Senate nor the Ge7
eral of the army would Hancock reco
nize right of influencing in any d
% gree by military measures the selectit
= Of a President, and that any orde
V apparently directed to that end wou
: be construed and treated by him Cha