Year: 1877

: vassed. IF there is any ground state
: in the report of the committee hay
!, been unable to find it. Mr.. Carpent,
: entertained a different opinion fro
, nearly every Senator as to the peeulis
} relations of Louisiana to the Federi
: Union. He may have voted upon th;
ground; but 1 believe that no othe
Senator, or not more than one or two


shared his opinion. / believed hi
Honor who made the inquiry of m
: voted in the affirmative on the resolu


tion that the vote should not be count


ed.


Now, may it please your Honors,
refer to this precedent as authority fo


two propositions: First, that the test


mony taken by committee of eithe


of the houses inquiring into the regu


larity and legality of an electoral vot


is competent testimony to be consider


ed when the question arises as to wha


disposition you shall make of tha


vote; secondly, that it is competent 70


Congress, under the Constitution o


the United States, to go behind tn


certificate of the Governor and throw


out vote where the testimony proves


that that certificate does not properly


indicate the wishes of the people il


the individuals that certificate desig


mates as the agents of the State, anC


those facts being established, it is com
petent to discard the vote.


But, may it please your Honors, the


case OF the State of Florida present:


itself to the court in a peculiar aspect


The evidence which we shall offer anC
which we claim to be admissible i:


evidence furnished by the State her


self as indicated in the proposition read


by the distinguished gentleman with


whom | have the honor to be associat.


ed, (Mr. O'Conor.)


/ Two propositions as to evidence
then, come before your Honors


/ First. Whether the United States,


through its Congress, or either or both
houses of Congress, can, in reference


to an electoral vote, institute an origi-


nal inquiry itself, and by committee
of either house take testimony going
behind the certificate of the State, and
invalidate that certificate on its own


motion, when the State still adheres to
the regularity of that certificate. That
is one question, a very important one;


but their is another totally different
from that.


Second. Whether when the houses


of the Congress of the United States


come to inquire into the electoral vote,


and ascertain which vote shall be


counted, it is competent for them to
receive evidence furnished by the State


herself in in reference to the certificate


her Governor may have given.


Your HoBOrs perceive at once the


wide difference In the two cases, and |
respectfully submit in connection with
that proposition that if the power does
not exist in the two houses of Congress
as a primary and original power separ-
ately to take testimony going behind
the certificate, then it must exist in
the State to correct its own certificate
or impeach it for fraud or falsehood;
or else we may be inevitably tied to an
accident or mistake, and Presidential
election may turn upon a certificate
which is known to all the world to be
an accident, a falsehood, or a fraud,
which can neither be impeached by
the State that gave it because Offraud,
accident, or mistake, nor interfered
with in any way by the Federal Gov
ernment to which it is addressed, but
must be a substantial and perpetual
truth in the presence of convincing
evidence that it is an active and living
lie.


In the case of the State of Florida,
taking up the second proposition, the
State herself after the meeting of the
electors, ascertaining that this certifi-
cate given by Governor Stearns was
given either in mistake or fraud, and
founded upon an irregular and illegal
canyass Of the votes according to the
laws Of Florida, by her Legislature
passed law directing another canvass
to be made. But she did not pass
that law, even, until she had appealed
to her judicial tribunals to interpret
the laws previously existing and relat-
ing to the subject. Having appealed
to those tribunals to interpret these
laws, and in the naGnddnus case hav-
ing received from her tribunal of last
resort an opinion giving construction
to those previously existing laws, by
which opinion it became apparent that
the returning board had transcribed
its legal duties and jurisdiction, and
made return which was erronenous
under the law, her Legislature then, on
the basis of that opinion, direct ted an
other canvass of the vote to be made
in accordance with the judicial con-
struction Of the law.


When that canvass was made and
to the Legislature her Legis-
k,,r hn hnu
of that canvass, declaring that the
parties to whom the certificate had
been issued by Governor Stearns had
not been appointed, and designating
the persons who had been chosen as the |
agents of the State to speak her voice
10 the electoral college. But she has
gone further A quo lcdrrGntO was is |
sued against these parties who assumed |
to exercise the electoral Office under
the certificate granted by Governor
Stearns, and that quo tCGrrdntO having
come before her judicial tribunals
they, in the exercise of a jurisdiction |
given to them by the State laws of
Florida, decided that the men who had |
received that certificate were not elect !
ed, but that other men were elected; !
and those other men so elected receiv-
ed certificate from the Governor of
Florida, and in the execution of the |
Office to which they had been appoint
ed by the people In the previous No |
vember discharged their duties as cleo |
tors and voted on the day designated |
by the law of the United States.


Now, then, may it please your
Honors, you have from that State this |
evidence, evidence from her Legisla-
ture, evidence from her Executive, |
evidence from her judicial tribunals, |
that the electors to whose vote we OBJ |
iect were not the duly appointed cleo
tors of Florida; and through all the
other government Florida |
therefore comes to the United States |
Congress and begs that you (for you
now exercise that power and it is vest
ed in you) will protect her people from !
the enormity of having their voice !
simulated by parties never appointed |
to speak in her behalf. Is not that |
evidence to go before the |
houses of Congress ? If il is not, and |
if Congress itself cannot in the exer-
else of its original power go forward /
and inquire into the manner and due |
of these electors, then yeu |
have placed the whole Government !
and administration of the United |
States in the power of any executive |
who may issue his certificate to a party !
never voted for at all, while the unan-
imous vote of the State may have been |