Year: 1876




of Nississippi may be assailed on the ground
that terrorism prevented a fair election,
or the entire vote of Kentucky, on the ground
that rira roce voting for Presidential electors
is illegal and void. Mississippi has been care
fully investigated by agents of the National
Republican Committee, who have accumu-
lated a mass of testimony not yet made
publjc. Few persons would listen to such
testimony as ground for defeating the pOpu-
lar will, but if it were apparent that the
will of the people would be defeated by the
knavery of one elector, is it not probable that
the Senate would seriously consider a mass OF
testimony showing that 10 free and fair elec-
ton had been held in Mississippi On techni
cal grounds, the vote in Kentucky is plainly
irregular. But fair men would never OBJECT
to it if the will of the people were to be de-
feated thereby. Suppose. however, that
technical objection to Kentucky will save the
will of the people from defeat by bribed or
treacherous electOr, is it clear that the cOrrup-
ton of an electOr might not be answered by
the exclusion of State 7


We do not discuss the prOpritty of these
steps; we point to them only because, If the
duly declared will of the people is to be de-
feated by fraud, bribery, or betrayal of trust,
the intense feeling sure to result is likely to
90 to extremes on the other side. Moreover,
large body of plain citizens, who will not
countcnance any act to rob Mr. Tilden of a
lightful election, would then begin to doubt
whether any technicalty whatever might not
be employed to defeat fraud If the legal de-
cision in the disputed Southern States, or either
of them, is in favor of Mr. Tilden, an over
whclming public opinion will fiown upon any
attempt to disturb the result by technical
means. Men may differ as to what the de-
cision should have been, but hosts of Republi-
cans will insist that the legal decision as to
what the will of the people III those States
really was must be respected. But there Is
no room for dispute as to the intention of the
people in Massachusetts or Oregon. An attempt
to defeat result thus legally secured by the
exclusion, corruption, or detection. of clec
tor, would rouse spirit of Indignation
in which many Democrats as well as Repub-
licans would excuse the resort to any technical
means for the defeat of such trick No
doubt prolonged dispute would follow. But
in the end. 10 man can become President
whom the Senate will not recognize as legally
elected. There are fair-mnded men in that
body who would not tolerate the counting
&" in" of Mr.. Hayes by fraud. but there are
also ir-minded men who would not tolerate
the counting out" of any candidate by
fraud bribery, or betrayal of trust. On the
Democratic side would be only the claim that
an elector has legal but not an honorable
right. to defeat the will of those who have
trusted him. On the Republican side, there
would be profound Indignation mt a breach
of faith or an act of corruption designed to
thwart the nations will.


If the result should be determined in favor
of Mr. Tilden, by decision of the constituted
authority that majority of the legal votes
had been east for him in either of the disputed
States, the Republicans Will submit to defeat
No attempt to reverse it by any technical plea
or trick will meet with any countcnance. But
if the legally declared result is the election OF
Mr.. HAYES. we doubt whether any cector can
defeat that result, whether for personal gam,
or for hope of office, or by betrayal of his trust
for any other motive. Mr.. Tildcn's friends
would then be clearly in the wrong ut
the outset, anu the strong IeciinS arouscu
would not be- restrained Ivy any public senti-
ment in the resort TO technical means for his
defeat