Year: 1877




was vested by law in the Returning Boards2
Did they think it was not vested in the peo-
pie No, that is impossible. But they may
have conscientiously believed that the inter-
est of their faction would be we'll served by
Hayes election. They may have been
pet-bag government, and were sincerely
anxious to save it from Tilden's reform.


ITS PETTIFoGGING.


But this decision in favor of fraud which
so shocked the common sense and common
honesty of the nation was not made without
some attempt to justify it. The eight gave
reasons so many and so plausible that Kel-
logg and Wells must have chuclked with de-
light when they heard them. One argli-
mentvery seriously urged was that it would be
troublesome, and require great deal of
time, to ascertain who was duly appointed
by the people. 1t was much easier to ac-
cept the false vote and say no more about
it. To decide how many and what persons
got certificates from the Returning Board
was short and simple process but to push
the inquiry behind that-to inquire wheth-
er the certificate was honest, to look for the
evidence which would show who were duly
appointed-hic tabor hoe opus est. The seven
reminded the eight, but reminded them in
vain, that the due appointment which no.
body in the world, except the people, had
the least right to make was the very thing
vyhi oh IN End
they could not be excused from duty to
which they were pledged and sworn, by the
mere inconvenience of performing it. Be-
sides, the eight knew very well that there
was no difficulty in it; it was but looking
at the record of the appointment as the peo-
pie made it up; they could read it as they
ran the truth was palmer than the lie;
the honesty of the case was as easily seen
as the fraud. But no persuasion could in
iluence them to cast even a glance at the
actual appointment. What did they think
this commission was made for? Why was
this great combination Of learning and state
craft set up? According to the eli ght its sole
purpose was, not to determine any matter in
! dispute between the parties, but merely TO
declare that the Returning Board had GER
titled for the Hayes electors; which every
body knew already ,and nobody ever denied. If
its object was what the law said-to decide
who were duly appointed-then the eight
succeeded in making it merely splendid
abortion, because, among other reasons, it
was too much trouble to make it anything
else.


HEDGING FOR OREGON.


But the commission following the lead
of counsel for Mr.. Hayes, insisted that the
certificate of the proper State officer ought
to be regarded as conclusive evidence of the
appointment made by the people. 1t is un-
doubtedly true that the Sttae has right to
speak on this subject through her own or
gans, and when she does so speak, her voice
should be regarded as true. But what Of
fficer is her proper organ? The Governorbe-
ing her political chief, and his certificate
being required by act of Congress. it would
not have been unreasonable to hold that it
was conclusive unless tainted with fraud The
Hayes electors had the Executive certificate
in Louisiana and Florida, and this, in re-
gard to those States, gave the eight great
legal advantage. But they threw it away,
abandoned the attestation of the Governor
as worthless, claimed no faith or credit for
it, and pronounced it open to contradiction,
no matter how honestly it may have been
given. What was the meaning of this phe-
nomenal ruling which apparently opened
the door of investigation even wider than
the Democrats asked? 1t was understood
by everybody. The commission was hedg-
ing for Oregon. The eight were reaching
across the Pacific for the one vote there,
which was just as important as the twelve
on the Cult of Mexico.


But having gone behind the Governors
certificate for the sake of correcting errors,
could there be any possible justification for
stopping before the truth was reached? II
the head of the Commonwealth, whose at
testation is required by Federal law, wen
for nothing whenever it was contradicted
how could the conclusiveness be asserted O.
paper made by subordinate officers un
known outside of the State, and powerles.
even by the local law to make certificate
of more than prima facie validity? Yet thu
Electoral Commission EIGHT to seven) dec
ded that the Governors certificate might b,
set aside for mere mistake of law or fact
while that of the Returning Board woult
stand, though known to be founded on false
hood and saturated all through with corrup
ton.


Il EVIDENCE ALIUNDE.


, The unvarying preference of the eigh
! Commissioners for the false over the true be
comes very striking at this point. Whel
they got behind the Governors papers, the


found lying aliuRde two other sets of docu
ments, one of which was record of tn
actual appointment made by the people
the other was mere fabrication of the Re


turning Board without any semblance {


truth; they embraced the latter with all tn
ardor of sincere affection, and rejected tn
former with all possible marks of their d
I like.


To give the DEGREES of the Returnir
T Boards the conclusive effect claimed for then
e it was necessary to hold that they were |,
. gally invested with judicial powers, and tn
e their jurisdiction, whether rigbtfully or e
/ roneously exercised, was absolute over IL
= whole subject matter In Florida the statu
: which creates the board gave it nothing e.
a.. cept ministerial powers, and the Supren
Court of that State solemnly pronounced
t claim of judicial authority to be altogeth
= unfounded. But the Electoral -CommissiC
n would not be influenced by either the wri
b. ten or the unwritten law. The commissiC
n conceded to the Louisiana board all the j.
e dicial power it needed to sanctiy its disfsl
-s chisement of the people in the face of th