Year: 1877

REPORT.


Mr. Edmunds of Vermont presented
the report in the Senate, and Mr.. Payne
of Ohio in the House. Each stated that
he should move to take up the bill at
an early day, probably by Saturday in
the Senate, or Monday at latest. Mr..
Edmunds added that the. committee
were of the opinion that the measure
they recommended was not what could
be called a compromise, but was
measure of justice in aid of constitu-
tiOnal government. No one would have
the right to say that anybody's views
had been surrendered in any respect.


A report accompanies the bill, which
expresses the belief that the law pro-
posed cannot be justly assailed as un-
constitutional by any one. Fidelity to
the constitution is observed when we
find that the law we recommend is con-
slstent with that instrument. The COM
mittee say: In all just governments
both public and private rights must be
defined and determined by the law.
This is essential to the very idea of
such government, and is the charac-
teristic distinction between free and
despOtic systems. However important
1t may be whether one citizen or an
other shall be chief magistrate for a
period prescribed, upon just theories of
civil institutions, it is of far greater mo-
ment that the will of the people lawfully
expressed in the choice of that officer
shall be ascertained, and carried into
effect in a lawful way. 1t is true that
in every operation of a government of
laws, from the most trivial to the most
important, there will always be pos
sibility that the result reached will not
be the true one. The executive officer
may not wisely perform his duty, the
courts may not truly declare the law,
and the Legislative body may not enact
the best laws, but in either case to re-
sist the act of the executive, the courts
or the Legislature acting constitutionaTy
and lawfully within their sphere would
be to set up anarchy in the place of
government.


We think, then, that to provide a
clear and lawful means of performing a
great and necessary function of govern
ment in time of much public dispute
is of far greater Importance than the
particular advantage that any man or
party may in the course of events Dos
sibly obtain. But we have still en-
deavored to provide such lawful aoeu-
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 legislature and
the Judiciary are represented in the
tribunal in equal proportions. The
composition of the judicial part of the
commission looks to a selection from
different parts of the republic, while it
is thought to be free from any prepOn-
derance of suppOsable bias, and the
addition of the necessary constituent
part Of the whole commission, in order
to obtain an uneven number, is left to
an agency the farthest removed from
prejudice of any existing attainable one.
1t would be difficult, if not impossible,
we think, to establish tribunal that
could be less the subject of party criti-
cism than such one. The principle
of its constitution is so absolutely fair
that we are unable to perceive how the
most extreme partisan can assail it. un-
less he prefers to embark his wishes
upon the stormy sea of unregulated
procedure, hot disputes and dangerous
results, that can neither he measured
nor defined, rather than upon the fixed
and regular course of law that ensures
peace and the order of society, what
ever party may be disappointed in its
hopes.


The unfortunate circumstance that
no provision had been made on the
subject before the election has greatly
added to the difficulties of the com
mittees in dealing with it, iuasmuch as
many of the people of the country,
members of the respective political
parties, will perhaps look with jealousy
upon any measure that seems to involve
even possibility of the defeat of their
wishes, but it has also led the commit
tee to feel that their members are
bound by the highest duty in such a
case to let no bias or party feeling stand
in the way of just, equal and peaceful
measure for extricating the question


from the embarrassments that at pres
ent surround it.


In conclusion, we respectfully beg


leave to impress upon Congress the


necessity OF speedy determination


npon this subject. 1t is impossible to


estimate the material loss the country


daily sustains from the existing state of


uncertainty. 1t directly and power


fully tends to unsettle and paralyze


business, to weaken public and private