Year: 1877




late election. It must be obvious to
every person conversant with the his.
tory Of the country land with the form
alton and Interpretation of the consti-
tuition, that wide diversity of views
and opinions touching the subject, not
wholly cOincident with the bias or
wishes of members of the political
parties, would naturally exist. We
have in this state of affairs chosen,
therefore, not to deal with abstract
questions, save so far ds they are nee.
essarily involved in the legislation
proposed. It is, of course, plain that
the report of a bill implies that in our
opinion legislation may be had on the
subject in accordance with the consti-
tuition, but we think that the law pro-
posed is inconsistent with few of the
principal theories upon the subject.
The constitution requires that the
electoral votes shall be counted upon
a particular occasion. AL will agree
that the votes named in the consti.
tuition are the constitutional votes of
the State and not others, and when
they have been found and identified
there is nothing LETT to be disputed or
decided. All the rest is the mere
clerical work of summing up the mum.
bers, which, being done, the con.
stiution itself declares the con-
sequences. This bill then is only
directed to ascertaining for the
purpose and in the aid of counting
what are the constitutional votes of
the respective States, and whatever
jurisdiction exists for such purposes,
the bill only regulates the method of
exercising it. The constitution, the
only great instrument and security for
liberty and order, speaks in amplest
language for all such cases, in whatev.
er aspect they may be presented. 1t
declares that the Congress shall have
power to make all laws which shall be
necessary and proper for carrying into
execution the foregoing powers and all
other powers vested by the constitu-
tion in the government Of the United
States. or any department. or officer
thereof. The committee therefore
think that the law proposed cannot be
F; justly assailed us unconstitutional by
any one, and for this reason we think
it unnecessary, whatever may be our
individual views, to discuss any of the
theories referred to. Our fidelity to
the constitution is observed when we
find that the law we recommend is con-
sistent with that instrument. The
matter then being proper subject for
legislation, the fitness Of the means
proposed becomes the next subject of
consideration. Upon this we beg leave
to submit few brief observations. In
all just governments both public and
private rights must be defined and de-
termined by the law. This is essential
to the very idea of such government,
ana is the characteristic distinction
between free and despotic systems.
However important it may he whether
one citizen or another shall be Chief
Magistrate for period prescribed, up
on the just theories of civil institu-
tions, it is Of far greater moment that
the will of the people, lawfully ex-
pressed III the choice of that officer,
shall be ascertained anil carried into
effect in a lawful way.


1t is true that in every operation of
a government the laws, from the
most trivial to the most important,
there will always be a possibility that
the result reached will not be the true
one. The executive officer may not
wisely perform his duty. The court
may not truly decide the law, and the
Legislature may not enact the best
law but in either case to resist the
act OF the Executive, the Courts or the
Legislature acting CO, ,lstitutionally and
lawfully within their sphere, would be
to set up anarchy in place of govern.
ment. We think, then. to provide
clear and lawful means of performing
this great and necessary function of
the government in q time of much pub.
lie dispute, is of far 81 eater Importance
than the particular advantage that any
man or party may, in the course of
events, possibly obtain;but we have still
endeavored to provide such lawfula lagen.
cies of decision in the present case as
shall be the


MOST FAIR AND IMPARTIAL


possible under the circumstances.
Each of the branches Of the Legisla.
ture and the judiciary are represented
in the tribunal in equal proportions.
The composition of the judiciary part
of the commission looks to a selection
from different parts of the Republic,
while it is thought to be free from any
preponderance of supposable bias, and
the addition of the necessary c0nstit'
uent part of the whole Commission, in
order to obtain an uneven number, is
left to an agency the farthest re.
moved from prejudice from any exist.
ing allowable one.


! It would be difficult, if not impossi.
ble, we think, to establish 4 tribunal
that could be less the subject of party
criticism than such one. The prin.
ciple of it's construction is 80 absolute.
ly fair that We are not able to perceive
how the most extreme partisan. can
assail it, unless he prefers to embark
his wishes upon the stormy sea of I'm.
regulated procedure, hot disputes and
dangerous results, that can neither be
measured nor definec, rather than q
6xed and regular course of law that
ensures the peace and order of society,
what ever party may be disappointed
in its hopes. The unfortunate ci1cum.
stances that no provision had been
made on the subject before the elect.
ion has greatly added to the difficulties
of the committees in dealing with it.
such as that many of the people of
the country, members of the respec.
tive political parties, will perhaps
look with jealousy on any measure
that seems to involve even the proba
bility Of the defeat of their wishes
but it has also led the committees tc
feel that their members are bound by
the highest duty in such case to lei