Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1926-12-19
Fifty Years Ago
In The Star

Visitors to the National Museum in
this city. with its wealth of exhibits,
National Museum to %" note S from the
Is Proposed, t rraDSl grtrts par IA
The star Of December IL. 1875, that
the establishment of such an institu-
ton here:
THE centennial commissioners will
recommend to Congress the removal
of the Government building from Phil
adelphia to Washington, in order that
the exhibits of the different depart
ments may he preserved. We hope
Congress will heed the recommends
tions of the commissioners and take
the preliminary steps toward estab-
fishing what we need at the Capital
a great national museum. The Gov
eminent exhibit would make very
respectable beginning, and in single
decade we would doubtless be in pos
session of a collection which would do
credit to the country
AS the time for counting the cleo
toral vote approached so years ago
Seeking to Solve the proposals for
Electoral Problem. meeting e
caused by the closeness of the contest
were advanced. In The Star of Sep
tembee IA, 1875, is the following:
"Sen3tor Edmunds' amendment to
the Constitution vesting the power of
counting the electoral vote In the
United States Supreme Court was put
g.
ceived but IA votes out Of 45 cast.
But one Democratic Senator, Mr.. Key
of Tennessee, voted for IT, while Is
Republican Senators voted against It..
1t is a notable fact that among the
supporters of Mr.. Edmunds amend
ment were Senators of conceded abil-
ity like Anthony, Blaine. Conkling,
Frelinghuysen, Hamlin. Morrill, and
Wright. who probably voted for 1t be-
cause they believed 1t the best plan
or any yet presented for settling the
presidential question.
The Democratic Senators seem to
he shy Of referring the question to
tribunal the members of which, with
one exception, Justice Clifford. had
been appointed by Republican admin
istrations. Some of these have, how
ever, been considered to be decidedly
conservative, If not democratic. and
one of them, Justice Davis. sufficiently
so to be talked of a good deal as a
Democratic candidate for the presl-
dency. But whether the court was
distrusted as whole politically, or
whether it was held to be bad public
policy to make the great legal tribunal
of the country an arbitrator in pol1ti-
cal matters, 1t was evident that the
Democratic leaders had agreed to give
fr of ar
the matter to that court. 1t Is under
stood, too, that while the justices of
the Supreme Court did not make any
formal protest against the passage of
Mr.. Edmunds' measure. several or
them made representations to individ-
uai Senators why in their opinion II
should not he adopted.
Now, while the particular measure
proposed by Senator Edmunds may
have been impracticable, through the
impossibility of getting 1t through
both houses of Congress by two
thirds vote and getting the ratifica-
ton of three-fourths of the State leg
islatures before the second Wednesday
of February, yet 1t by no means fol-
lows that the question will not in some
shape have to so to the Supreme
Court as the only tribunal that can
adjudicate upon the legal controver-
sizes in which the disputed electoral
votes are involved. Every other de-
vice yet mentioned would inevitably
decide the controversy beforehand and
is therefore out of the question as q
feasibility AS suggested by the Phil
adelphia Public Ledger, it does not
require an amendment to bring the
Supreme Court to the aid of the Sen
ate and House of Representatives for
the determination of legal doubts
about electoral votes. An act of Con-
gress would be quite sufficient. for
such law would be for the execution
OF the Constitution and for providing
regulation by law for the performance
Of duties by the two houses In case
where the Constitution imposes the
duty but is entirely silent as TO the
mode of proceeding"