The New York Herald Newspaper, January 24, 1877, Page 5

THE ELECTORAL QUESTION. —_+—_———_ The Gladiators of Debate in the Senate Chamber. — ey CONKLING'S GREAT FORENSIC EPPORY. The Pretence of the Vice President’s Authority Demolished. Law, Precedent, Reason and the Future of Things Against It. THE SPEECH OF SENATOR SHERMAN. What Was Said and What Left Unsaid. SCENE IN THE SENATE CHAMBER. The Overwhelming Power of Public Sentiment Asserting Itself, DESPERATION OF THE EXTREMISTS. FROM OUR SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT. Wasutxaton, Jan, 23, 1877. CONTINUANCE OF THE DEBATE ON THE ELEC- TORAL BILL—WHAT SENATOR SHERMAN SAID AND WHAT HE NEGLECTED TO SAY—MI. CONKLING’S GREAT SPEECH—THE PRETENSE O¥ THE VICE PRESIDENT'S POWER DISPOSED OF—a CONSIDERATION OF THE PRECEDENTS, ‘The second day's debate in the Senate has at least Settled the question of the Vice President’s powers un- | fer the coustitution, Senator Conkling, seriously illand tvidently suffering, yot so vigorously attacked and so \Wrenchantly and thoroughly demolished, from every possible point of view, the pretence that the President of tho Senate was ever intended by the framors of the tonstitution to count the vote, or te do more than open the certificates, or that he ever counted the vote, or assumed the authority to do so, or could, under any possible construction of the constitution, be supposed to possess the power to do it, that it is not probable + Any one will have tho hardihood hereafter to revive this question. Senatur Sherman opened the debate, and, like Sena- tors Morton and Cameron yesterday, was shocked at the proposal to bring the Supreme Judges into poli- tics. Ho was shocked also at the manner in which tho ‘Judges wore se‘ected, and seemed never to have known ofavaso of arbitration whoro two arbitrators were chosen with leavo tochoose a third themselves. A considerable part of Mr. Sherman’s speech was a ‘ ptudied trisult to the Supreme Judges, whom apparently he would not be willing to trust to arbitrate a tweuty-five dollar law sult, in which he was interested. Even Senator Morton looked as though Mr. Sherman twas o¥erdotng this matter a little, for Mr. Morton doudtess remethbered ‘that ho said only last March, ‘@ little more thun ten months ago: It scoms to me that if we have got to rofer this qnestion to any body it would be more satisfactory to ,Fefer it to the Supreme Court-of the United States, and if you caonot do it ithe character of the su- preme Court, then let your special tribanal be com- posed of judges of that court, and let them decide, and deeido it forthwith, And again:— If wo have power to give any outside tribunal juris- dictivn, we have powor to give 1s to the Supremo Court, and that would be the most satisfactory tribunal to which we could refer so grout a quostion, The peo- ple of this country would submit with more satisfzc- tion to the decision of that body than they would to tho decision of any one,man, 1 care not how wise or how great he might be, or to any special tribunal that ‘we might create, SKNATOR SHRRMAN’S NEGLECT. Mr. Sherman quoted Mr. Pinckney out of an old debate in support of his views, but he forgot to tell tho Senate that with the exception of Messrs, Pinck- ney and John Randolph in the old times, and at most five or six Senators and Representatives, no one in either house has, since the fousdation of tho govern- ment, doubted the powers of Congress over the electoral vote, Ho neg'ected to tell the Senate that in all the debates on this question from the foundation ot the government to the beginning of this session, not ten men, drunk or sober—and one of them was un- douptedly drunk when be spoke—havo asserted that tho Vice President bas the right, under any circum- stances, tocount the vote. He neglected also to fell the Senato that when, for the only time in 1801 the joint committeo appointed as usual to as- tertain and ‘‘roport a method of examining the votes tor l'resident and Vice President” failed to agreo, the Vice President did not thereupon assume to count the Vote, but the two houses, notwithstanding no rule Or method had been adopted, kopt the matter in their own hands precisely as thoy have done ever Since, so that there is no precedent for the jam p- tion that, evon in the extrome caso whore the two houses fail to agree upon a “method of examining the vote,” the Vice President has any power in the mat- ter. SENATOR CONKLING'S SPEECH. When Mr, Sherman closed Mr. Conkling rose. 1t fa known that ho has, within a days, suflered a relapse of the malarial disease from which he has been a severe gufforer sinco last summer, and on his desk, beside a fragrant cap of tea, were hardly used. THE VICE PRESIDEN?’S POWER, He attacked the assumption that the Vice President had or was intended by the framers of the constitution to have any power whatever in regard to the electoral Vote, except to open tho certificates, and his argument ‘was that of agreatlawyer as well as of a staresman. It was fall of information. His statements were exact, bis languago sparkling with epigram, his abundant = illustrations ~=— pertinent «= aad luminous, and he demolished first the front and then the flanks of the fortress on which the opponents of ‘the bill bad intrenched themselves until nothing was lef, and when the-Senate broke up everybody felt that the question, at least, was {ully aud finally settled beyond the necessity or possibility of further argu- meat, Many passages tm the speech were very striking, and struck home indeed. Alluding to the language of the constitution which says that “tho President of the Senate shall open the electoral certificates and they shall then be counted,” he tarned aside, and, with one hand outstretched to the Senators, the other stretched toward the President's exclaimed, | “By him!” in a tone which set the galleries fluttering. j “If it bad bean intended that the vote should be counted by him, those two little wort: said he, “as two Senators have said before me, would have ex- Pressed that intention." Mr. Morton had, unluckily for nimself, asserted that the Vice President must not only count, but he must count all the votes, good, bad or indifferent. “Is a President, then, to be chosen,” asked Mr. Conkling, **by counting forged votes; votes for a man condemnoa to lasting disgrace and inability by the Senate on impeachment; votes fora dead man? Was it intended by those who framed the constitution that votes for edead man should fill with an aching void | the Presidential office? said, “that is a purely ministerial count a pile of paper ita the count bank notes, among which may be counterfeits, and to sort the truc from tho false, that requires the exercise of judgment. If New York should send here forty-five electoral votes they would not be counted; they would have to be sorted, He showed the puerility of the argument that if the houses were to scrutinize the vote the action of one house might bring the country to ruin, saying that one house might ruin the country by refusing Appropriations and in a multitude of other ways which he recited. ‘Govornment,” said he, consent of the governod. Isa majority of Congress | less to bo trusted than one man? A bare majority o¢ | this House might seloct a presiding officer for the express purpose of counting ina candidate, Is sucha creature of an hour of moro more trastworthy than the wisdom of the two houses? OPDHON ON THE ELECTION. ‘The audience caught eagerly at any words which seomed by implication to revea} Mr. Conkling’s opinions on the merits of the Presidential question, and there ‘was some sensation among the republicans when, al- luding to a former Senator, Howard, ho spoke of bim as one who, like himseit, believed in tho glorious achievements and the glorious destiny of the republi- cao party, { Hehad not finished when he sat down; indeed he | had touched but one of several points which he meant to cover, and the remainder of his speech will bo heard to-morrow, the Sonate mecting atcleven. But what he said this afternoon hada a great effect upon his listeners, chair, To count my fGngere,” he office; to same; “rests on the force or PROSPECTS OF THE WILL. It ia Delieved that the bill will pass the Senate by a threedoarths vote. Mr. Edmunds gave notice that ho ‘would insist upon a vote to-morrow. The opponents of the billare discouraged, but very bitter, and they are preparing to concentrate their eflorts upon the House, It is not true that Senator Gordon intends to vote against tho bill. He-does not like it entirely, but he will vote for itas the best attainable measuro and as necessary to the welfare of the country. DEBATE ON THE ELECTORAL BILL. SENATE. Wasuixcroy, Jan, 23,.1877. Tho Senate to-day resumed consideration of the bill reported by the select committeo in regard to counting the eloctoral vote, SPRECH OF MR. SHERMAN, Mr. Snerman said when the committee was ap- Pointed by both houses of Congress to take into con- sideration the count of the electoral vote he expected, a8 a matter of course, that in case the committee agreed he would be ablo to vote for their bill, He had the ngbest respect for the members of the committee, and it was a painful thing for bim to dissent trom the views of gentlemen whom he esteemed so highly, but | afer the brief exatmination ne had given the bill he felt it to be his duty to vote inst it. In dissenting from the views and erivicising the work of the committee he desired at the outset to express for the motives and work of the committee his sincere respect. The bil before the Senate was designed to settlo a case how made up, It ‘was a bill to make @ court to decide a.case already mado up. No ono favors this bill as permanent legis- lation, He argued that there were provisions in the Dill totally incompatible with the constitution of the United States, Such a law as this would be vil example and Senators should carctully examine to see if it could be supported by the constitution. ie only persons who were authorized by the constitution to ‘witness the count of tho olectoral vote were the Pres- ident of the Senate, the Senate and the House of Rep- resentatives, QUESTIONS IN CONSKCTION WITH THE VorE, Up to this time the four questions discussed in con- nection with the counting of the electoral vote were:— First—Shall the President of the Senate count the vote? Second—Can either house adinit or exclude a vote? | Third—Can both houses, concurring, do so? Fourth—Can the Vice-President decide if the two houses disagree? if PROPOSITIONS OF THE BILL. This bill pr ted other questions which were of » More grave and serious charactor, ‘Tho committee had reported here a bill which contained four propo- sitions :— that it was duabtful whether he could master strength enough to speak. Soon after he rose, members of the othcr houso bogan to pour into the Sen: Chamber, which was presently crowded, and fo remained until be sat down. Most of the prominent members of tho House, of both parties, were present, and with tho Galleries, which rapidly filled up, Mstened eagerly and with untlagging imterest to the speaker. Tho space In the rear of the circle was so darkened by an assemblage of distinguished men that, at various stages In dis address, the speaker turnod involantarily | toward them aa if appealing throagh them to what ho called the ‘patriotic virtue and the overwhelming common sense” of the country, William M. Hvarts, David Dudley Field, General Sherman, Sena- tors -olect and Hoar, and the flower of the House of Representatives were present, and Senator Thurman took up bi Position at the right of Wee Clerk's dosk, a selection not only convenient but | sepeciully complimentary to aSenator who was ad- (essing the body. Indisposed as ho-evidently was, We, Conkling did not lack vigor, He spoke extem- porancously, not having had’ the strength necessary for careful preparation, and the few notes which lay Lamar First—That the President of the Senate ims nothing to do but to preside over the joint moeting and open NEW YORK HERALD, WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 24, 1877.—TRIPLF_ SHEET. the Chief Justice excluded? He (Mr. Sherman) did | Senate the choico of the President in case Was not authorized und the judicial power of the | constitution. It was to i political court, and was not ution atall, He thoughs th to his friend, the J mont (Mr. Edmunds), because in a ate a year ago he shadowed the very propositions of this bill Mr. Sherman denied that Justices of the Supreme Court (also officers of the government) could be thas called upon to fll other offices, as this bill pro) The pructico had been in such cases for the President to nominate such officers and the Senate to coniirm them. Ifone officer is designated to perforin the duties of unother he must be confirmed by the Senate. DELEGATING THE POWRR OF CONGRESS. Another objection he had to the bill was thas It uo- dertook to delegate powers conferred upon Congress to ® commission, It was an axiom of the law that legislative powers could not be deiegated. This bill was intended to apply to a case already passed, ended and concluded, and wi aconstitutional on that ground. 11 the power to legisiate could not be delezuted by either house of Congress, how could this power cun- trolling the vote of States be delegated? This enor- mous power which could undo the work of the State could not be delegated to a packed tribapal, Another feature of the bill, in bis mind, violated the spirit of the constitution, which provided that vo member ot Congress could bold an office created while he bad a seat in Congress The members of the Senate and House on this commission were not, like other committees of Congres: to their respective bi ; pointed on the commission they were independent of either house of Cougress, He argued that the Senate | delegated all of its power to the committee of five and the House did the same, and that power | could pot be withdrawn, it was) bardly wssible that this power would be abused; | utifit should be Congress would be compellod to stand by helpless. He argued that tho Prosiaent of the Sonate nad tho power Ww open and count the eleo but had now got rid of it, Suppose the judges of the | Supreme Court should refuse to pertorin the duties imposed upon them by this bill, Congress could uot compel them to do so, lt was simply tmposing upon these Judges a troublesome and paintul matter without defining their power, Ifthe judges should dechne to act the scheme would be at an end. ACTION OF THE COMMISSION. When the counts should take placo and the State of Florida was reuched, must the commission take the certificate of Governor Stearns or the subsequent deci- s1on of the Supreme Court of the State? What would be done tn the case of Louisiana’ Would the commis. sion accept the certificate of Governor Kollogg, the rocognized Governor of the State, or would it inauire ag to all the bull-dozed parishes and open up the whole case anew? Would the commission be bound to take the itlcates of 1 legal ollleers of the Staces? Why did not the members of the committee have something to say in regard thoreto, If tis commission were to take voles us certitiod, everybody knew who was President, but if they wero to go back of tho returns God only knows what would be the result. It would depend upon the chance in selecting the ith justice of the Supreme Court, Mr. THuRMaN, (dem.) of Ohio, sid the bill sensto the commission all questions of law as well as of fact How they would decide no mortal man could tell, Mr. SuxemaN—That depends upon chance in the Supreme Court, Continuing his argument he sald:-—The Sonate was now usked to vote for this bill, which substituted chance for the vote of the electors, g:ven according to law. He contended that the bill :trusted to a secret conclave the power to elect u President; it was a col- lege of cardinals for that purpose, While this commis- sion would be in secret session considering as to how the vote of Florida must be counted, tho greut States of Now York, Pennsylvania and Ono would remain uncounted; tho people would be ina fover of excite- ment; the controversy wouid be delayed, because tho very bill provided machinery tor doluy. He bad podount members of the commission would endeavor to do their tull duty ; but this imposed upon them impossi- bie dutics. Why was the power of the President of the Senate teared? Every act of bis in counting the voto must be done in public and would be clusely watched; but by this bill that may was giver ton secret committee. Suppose this high commission should rejoct tho vote of aState. It would be depriv- ing the Stute of its vote, Where was tne clause in the constitution conferring that power upon anybody ? He submitted to the Senate thar it was nee to count the vote as it had been counted heretofore, as it had been counted twenty-two times during the bistory of the government. [t was bigh time that the extrome powers cluimed tor Congress \o eject the vote of a State should be renounced lustead of afllrmed, as this bill proposed. Mr, Stev: on jem.) of Ky., denied that tho com- authori: by the bill a seeret conclave. » SHERMAN said tho bill gave the comission power to muke Its own rules andovery one kuew it would be secret. He only approved of one feature df tho Dill, and that was that neither house had the rig! to reject the electoral vote of a State. It was said th the country was in peril, and would be do nothing to save the country? Yes, he would obey the law as 1b existed since 1780. He was opposed to patching up Jaws and introducing into our electoral colleges the blind goddess of chance. If Tilden was elected let bim, by all means, epjoy the honors of the office; and if Hayos was elected ail should yteld w him a liwiul obedience. SPEECH OF SEXATOR CONKLING. Mr. ConkiinG said:—Mr. Prxsipent—Bofore reach- ing the details of this measure or its advantages or merits, we must make sure of the power in some modo to subject the matter to the action of the two houses or to the law-making power, A study of this question years ago convinced me of the right and thorefore tho duty of Congress, or the two houses, to ascertain and verily electoral votes and declare the true result of Presidential elections, or eise by an exertion of the law- making power, to declare how these acts shall be done. My present judgment, I may say in passing, does not rest wholly on preconceived opinions, Some weeks ago, when the inquiry seemed likely to assume unprecedented importance, I reviewed carelully, conscientiously I hope, every act and pro- ceeding in our bistory bearing upon it, and, without the aid then of compilations made since, every utter- anco in regurd to it to be found in books, A distinc- tion may be drawn between the power of the Senate and the House to act literally and directly in conduct- ing the electoral count, and the power of Congress by law to provide for the proceeding In any mode except the literal and personal action of the two houses, plore that distinction, or to inquire how far, or whether ‘at all, the constitation ineulcates the exact mode or form in which the two houses shall execute the twelith article of amendment, CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS, If the constitution means that the two houses aro to ascertain, verity and declare, or if 1} means simply to to ve denoted by the law-making power the mode in the constitution, that the houses themselves shbali do this office the bill doos not overpass the constitution, ing {8 that the act is ordered to be done, and noagency article of the constitution tn these concluding words; and prover tor e the foreyuing powers und all other powors vestod by the constitution in the government of the United States or in uny department or ofticer thereof, It, however, the power in question 1s deposited by } the constitution and is not deposited with the two houses, neither the bill on the tuble nor any bill, rule or plea secking to draw it within the province of the the constitution deposits this power with you, sir, the President of the Senate, there is the end of the ques- tion as to the two houses and as to each house. your power; as for oxainple, direct that you shall open the certificates. Second—One house cannot reject a vote, Third—The two houses by a concurring vote may do f0, Fourth—It provided for a grand commission, the de- cision of which was to bo tinal until overruled by the concurring vote of the two hou: It was known by the select committee that in one house one political party was in power and that in the Other the other political party had control, The com- mitteo knew that in the Senate three members of tho majority and two of the minority would ve appointed members of she commissiwn and in the House of Representatives the samo rule would be followed, thus the mombera ot tho comnris- sion, representing each house of Congress, would neutralize each other, He did not say the members of jon might not rise above purty predilev- do 1ULLerS aecording to law, The other Mansion were to be Judges of the Supreme Court, He denied that the four Juuges domgnated by the bil were selected on account of geographical location, It that was the case, it was strange that all of that vast region lying be- tween the Alleghany Mountains and ihe Mis. sissippt River bud) been excladed from t court, Mo argued = that the four Judges were selected on account of their political opint wo re mting either party, titteen bor of the commission was tu be de- ended by NCO. virtually dociding by chance who would be President of the Uaited Statcy. Why was ‘and The titth Juuge an ) euacted part of it utterly void—a bold intrusion upon the con- sutution. If such be the mandate of this fundamental law every rule, every regolution appointing com: mittees [rom 1793 to 1869, every procveding taken by tho two houses in this regard, Was a flagrant intrusion upon the constitytion aid usurpation of powers withbeld from them. 1t has never been seriously con- tonded until uf late—it never was seriously contended until we bad a cago on hand, if | may borrow a phrase from a.distinguished statesinan—that this power be- longs to one huuse alone or to one house more than to another. Those who challenge tho competency of such a bili mafptain that the powers reside in the Presiaent of tfie Sonate, POWKES OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE SENATE, ‘This question 1 Propowe ww examine by the text of the constitution, aided by tho settled rules of truce tun, by the opinions of the most illustrious men of four generations and by the practice and acquiescence the nation and of all the departments of the gov ™ for eighty-seven years, The President of the Senate |s clearly the person to whom the electors are to transmit their doings and tho title of their oflices. The conetitution requires the electors to meet in their respective States under certain restrictions, to vote for President and Vice President, to make a certificate and statement of their proceedings, and to transmit It seuled to the. seat of government, directed to tho Pre nt of the Sonate, Tho act of 1792, re- 874 a6 part @ Revined Stututos, ampli. v8 tho duties of electors somewhat, and requires them to annex to those cortificates the certificate of the Gov- ofnor, constituting their own title to act, How the Preaident of the @ came to bo the recipient aad cumeoamn of th oves We ate DOs loft to conjecture. It was at one time proposed to sive to tho duced unl oponed, , Following these words we ¢ Hresident of the senate shalt. in the preseuce ot the | Senate ‘ cutes, and the votes shal! It ig not my purpose at this moment to ex- | | | | command that the votes shall be counted, and leaves | which that suall be done, the bill on oar table executes | If the true meaning of article 12 is | If the true mean- | ia expressly designated, then the law-making power 1s | | told how to proceed by the eighth section of the frst | hall have power to make xll laws which | rying into execution | must remain while the constitution 1s our guide, If | ‘The | law may regulate the modes in which youshall execute | the certificates of the States alphabetically or other. | the count, to determine what shall ‘The arguinent, | may say hero, as 1 understand it implication irom aa implicativn, First thas not hike that. If he was to choose between this oill | of a failure by the electors to elect. and war ho would accept the bill, but te did notbe- | Such a plan was admined, 1s changed hheve there was apy danger. | many of is features its 2 ieavure THE CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTION. Was rejected; but, as we ustially , however The court or commission author'zed by this bill | objectionable to the Senate, the is Of action in con- videring it and change it by ame: vy one, ‘so this dralt remamed betore the Convention and wax ot discarded totully aud a new one substituted tur Ove of the provisions which escaped « change was the designation of the reeipient and custodian of the electoral votes, The power to choose a President iu the event of tuilure by the electors was transferred to the House of Representatives, but the custodian | orginally selected remained,’ The reasou, the Raburainess of the orgimal suggestion, will occur foeverybody. If the Senate wus to choose a real deut ia the event of a jailure to elect it was uulural that with the presiding officer of the senate the votes should be lodged, With or without this ray of light, however, a8 to tho designation of the custodian all will admit—it will not denied—that if any other functionary had been desiznated by the same words employed, had it been the President of the United States, the Secretary of State, the Speaker of the | nate, the Clerk of the House, the Secretary of the Se House. designated by the sume words standing in the constitution, his attributes, his functions, his preroga- tive would ‘have been precisely that Wherewitn you are endowed, neither more nor less. ‘This orings me to the laaznage ol articie 12. electors are to transmit their vores ‘The in sgaled packets, ‘The contents ate to be secret. For this there was a reason. Originally to the discretion of tho electors as a Wine, Sagacious and Uubiased body of men was com- mitted’ the wide selection of the Chiet Mugistra:e. ‘they were to vote by ballot im order to avoid denoting to bystanders the votex they gave, Under the protee- tion of a seal their votes a reoted ty be sent to the President of the Senate and by bim kept, and kept Jnvivlate, until they are newded, and then ‘to bo pro- wd House of Me wil the curtili proseutatty then Ye counted. A familiar maxim of the constitution 1, that mean. ing and elfect must be given us lar ay may be to every toral vote, and this bill was an attempt tu change the | word, This is true of the most trillin reemeut be. Suuple habits of our torefathors, woich were adhered | tween men, [t must be as true of a frame of a gov- to until 1865, when Congress, without consideration, | ernment iiboriousiy. devised and designed aa uo without debate, adopted the twenty-second joint rale, | ternal wedlock between peoples and Suatex, Perhaps the rst question that arises 18 the sigmitcance of the words—Iy the preseuce of thy Senate and House of Representatives,” The nmportanee attached to thei from occurrences in the First and gresses, in which sat eighteen of the th who made the constitution By ap act of Congress they required that on the day when the proceeding i question 18 to occur the Congress shall be in session. WITSKSSKS OR BPRCTATORS? For what is the Congress thus twice required to be in session? Obviously for some uct, or that its members may be spectators, J canuot say witnesses, for it the whole prococding is to be ¢ ad dotermined by one mun, 11 isnot easy to any effe or logul sense, the members can witness or Vor proceeding. If the Prexident of the Senate chovaes to Say unything they may hear, but nothing requires bin to speak a word, No declaration tn the end even is re- quired by the constitution, The whole thing may be in silence; but if he chooses to utter words the mem- bers of the houses may listen to them, notwith- standing that the proceeding is wholly bia He takes upapaper in his seat and peruses it as be would peruse a letter, ‘The members trom the body of the wil guz@ at the spectacle as they might gaze irom the galleries, and with no more power to know the s; ture, the figures, the seals impressed on the paper than tne concourse whieh sees the oath of office adminis- tered at the Capitol. It must, however, be admitied that these words standing alone may be satis- fied by supposing that the two houses, vow numbering about 400 men, ure to attend witn thelr officers as spectators of a pageant to see and be seen as gazers on 4 scene Wherein they can act no part, They may know or suspect a torgery or an error in returns, but if the power rated in the President of the Senate to conduct and dotermine the cobnt, the two houses and their members have no power to us- sort the error, much less to arrestit, Sul I say, stop- ping bere, it must be admitted that effect may be given tothe words I nave recited without ascribing more moaning than that I havo indicated. The text pro- ceeds The President of the Senate shall open all the certificates, Thero {s no room toy construction here. This isa plain grant of power to do a certain simple thing and a direction to do it, Now the language changes, “Tho President of the Senate’? ts dropped. He nowhere again appours, and the votes shull thon be counted— that 1s, 4 count of the voto shall then take pluce, That 1s what it means evidently—a count of the votes shallthen be had, ‘I'he votes shall then be counted.” By whom? As two Senators haye well inquired—why was it not said “by him?”—two little words. The mon who dratted that paper—masters of language as mostOf them were—were so fastidious In taste, 60 scru- pulous in the execution of their work, so determined that words should become exact vehicles of thought, that they appointed a committee on style in order that every syllabic might be serutinized. Mow, Mr. Presi- dent, Would men ordinurily instructed in the English Jupguage have expressed themselves bad they intended that the President of the Senate should count the votes? “The President of the Senate shall, in the prosence of the Senato and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and count the votes,” are the werds in which ninety avd nine men would naturally have jpoken, Had they “The Senate shall count the votes’ simply, that would huve beon plain. Why? Because no man cun count or cxatine the contents of a sealed packet without opening it, and ‘there, implication would tiave made all plain. So, had they said ‘open aud count the votes,” But no, be “shall open all the cer- uflcates, and the yotos shall then be counted.” Why “then! Ifthe President of the Senate had to open and count; il it was to in one by one person, all parts of it must be then,” tthey not? Why use twice a8 many words as were necessary, when the effect would be to bewilder at least, if not mislead the reader? ‘The constitution 1s terse, sanientious, a model of comprehensive brevity. In the first instance these words, ‘tin the presence of the Seuate and House of Representatives,” were proposed, not betore the word “counted,” but after the word “counted”; so that it would have stood and aid stund, ‘the votes shall then be counted in the presence of the Senate und House of Representatives.” In the earher consideration the words so standing were accepted; adopted more than once, At length the provision waa referred to the committee on style, and tn passing I beg leave to in- quire for what purpose? ‘To change the meun- ing of those who, by little accretions of concurrence had led up, step by step, with patience and with cure, the various bruoches of this great fabric, which was to tower so high and last so long? Was the purpose of the committee on style and its reference, I ask, to change the meaning ayd essonco as it had agreed to? Oh, no; but to deline it more sharply, to project it more distinctly before the minds of those why, In a far thereafter, would appeal to this instrument as their chart and compass. When the cominitteo re- ported these words to the consideration uf the Loo- vention they stood as they stand now:— Open all tho certificates in the presence ot the two houses and the vote shall then be counted, Was itever, io all the scratioy which these words underweat, proposed to commit, it to the President of the Senate? Were any of the térms 1 have suggested or other iorms clearly denoting that ever provosed at ally No, sir; but, on the contrary, alter all this care, the words, u3 We see them, were adopted as the last most dehberate consummate act of the constitution. But if we read these words sev intents appear in dropping the President of the Senate and employing the presont phrase :— Votes TO BR COUNTKD, The votes shall then be counted.” What votes? Not all votes, ‘+All the certificates’ ure to be opened, Dut not all the votes are to be counted. ‘The votes”? are to be counted, What votes? vuiid, true Votes; pot six voies from Oregon, although pear; not necessarily the three vous certified by Governor of Oregon, although be ts the certitying ofticer by the uct of 1792 and the only certitying officer wu to the Bationul laws, but the three honest votes, i there are three, Counting and ascertwiuing becomes substantial, and we see reasons tor 80 muking itil we recur only to the exclusion provided by the constitu. | tion, The honorable Seuator trom Indiapa yesterday ob- served that his view i# that the President of the Senute—I borrow lus phrase—'is to count everything, good, bud and tnduteren| belicve that. The act of 1792 declares, speukiug of the proceedings ia question, “that Congress shall be 1 session ou the second Wednesday in February, 1793, and on the second Wednesday tv February succeeaing two houses or of Congress 18 of the slightest | every meeting of the Glectors, and) tho sald certill- é cated,’? oF as Inany of then: as’ shall have been re- efeacy or effect. Whenever the constitution | cyivgg, shall then be opened, the votes counted, deposits a power with any department office | and the persons who shall {lil the vilices or functionary there it 1s and there it | of President and Vice President ascertained and declared agreeably to the constitution. ‘The constitution numes tive twstances in which no majority of votes shall work the ascertainment to fill the office of President of the United States, Was designed that votes casi for one dend should be counted, and that be should fill with au aching void the office of President of the United states? Was it desigued that votes torged should be counted, votes not certified, or certitied by w usurper blindly and without inquiry? Was it dgsigued, if lying on our wise, but any act which strips or attempts to strip you | table be a record denoui against a con- of your power, or an iota of the power which tho | Vicl, On tmpexchment, perpetual exciusion from ve every office of profit, emulument or trust, constitution gives you, or which aitempts to | that vows cust for’ him were to be put anybody in partnership with you in| counted and made offectual, because, ulthough not ihe exercise of, bat power =—or_——aany | pood, they might be bad or indifferent? No, Mr. resident; should the State of Massachusetts send here | un electoral certificate on which should appear as the first two electors the nainesof my bouored [riends the Senators from Massachusetts, and if there should fol- low as electors the names 'y Representative from Maxsachusetts, designating thet anu him respoce tively and senators aud Representative, | should read Jo the constitution that “no Senator or Representative shali be or shail even be appotnted wn elector,” and I should say those v althuugh they might be bad or inight be indifferent, ‘were not to be held good until they were at least considered.”’ IMPLIED POWERS, But it bas beon said that tne power of tho Prosident of the Senate, though not expressed in the coustitu- tion, may be implied from that which is expressed, It has been said, | think, that the President of the Senate may, in a closet or in a corner, a month in ad- vance, adjudge, determine and couclude the electoral couut by relusing to receive any cortilicate except that whieh hie desigacd in the end to count; that 1s, b might decide that he would receive two trom Oregon, that being a populous ay well as a large Stace, but that one must suitice for all the other States, and he would take but one, The President of the Senate, divcharging, a8 he customarily does, with conxcience and propriety, the duties resting on bum, has alrcady, ax 1 am imtormed, received contesting cates Irom the three or lour States from which they come, | bave beard no one argue that, having Teovlved thom, it will be bis duty suppress or Con. ceal them, and, thereiore, Ip to consider whether, by tmpleation, be has the power to adjudxo become of them, ) 18 of because The constitutional, | Mr. President, | cannot | Implied twat hus power to count and then irom that ia power tay venmplied that he bas | j the power to Getermine what suali be counted, und | | | then, Irom the topucatios graftec on the muphewion, | | that be has power to declare the efleet of tbe coant | aud whatis counted. This view certaimly deserves | consideration. It has found po voice m this chamber, | Now itisa view agaist wien, it | anisiake bot, every member tn this body on both sides, save two, stunds on bis oath recorded. 1 repeal, it has found no volee in this debate, but T uceept :t ‘respeettully as & suggestion Ww which I should tisteu because be- youd Unese Walls the thought has been expressed by those whose words aud reflections wre uot lguily to | ; be passed by. ‘The doctrine of tumpleation, as it } stands unchangably 1m the law, may thus be stated’— | j Wherever power is given to do a thing permission 18 in plied to use the ments to do it Whatever isessential to the full exec of enjoyment | | of a suing granted Is implied ur interred w be granted | also. | Life is full of tMustrations of this species of intend- | i i ment, A spotot grounl iv gragted im the tmidst of w greut Geld. 1114 implied that the yrantee bias granted | to hit ulso a right to pass over the intecvening ground to yetwo bis. When the constitution provide gress May coin mouey, inay t lish post offices wud phed to use the Ways and meaus and, according! establish mints, to establish bunks, to aucquite real estato in the State where post vilices may be built. That 1s the doctrine Of implication as declared by the | old Supreme Court, with Murshail a6 tts head, in Me- | Culioch vs, Maryland, Watson vs. the City of Charies- | tom and 1b Many noted cases since. | When the coasti:utiou authorizes the President, on | the call of the Governor ur Legislature, to send troops, | | upon the happening of a certain coulingeney, 1 im pues tuo power iu him to inquire aud determine Whether that contingency bas urixen, 50 said the | Supreme Court in the eof Mott vs, Martin, What | ever Is conveniently conuusive tu the execution of a | granted power may be interred, but the verminus and | Dounduries of the doctrine of implication are as cer. | tain as anything tn law can be | Mr. resident, when the act whieh i# expressly au- | thoria-d tas been perlormed, Wheu everything adxiit- ary lo that act has been done, there 18 au end of impli- cation and the eud of the whole master, Ibis the end of law ae i is in reason, and in reason an timplicd power must be subordinate to and involved in something beyond expressly authorized. — Express | power vever implies power todo anysaiug whatever | alter the thing authorized ba completed. Ex press thority to du an net o does Lot work Dy implication wuthority to do an act of another | Species, ‘The authorny to doa ministerial act does uot imply power to act judiemily, Authority tu act as the cusiodian of papers does not imply pow xereise | scundent acts of sovereigut te pubic determination, Aclerk of acourter the | chief justice of a court 1s made by saw the recipient of | papers, It is directed thut they shall be seut under | seal to him and that be shail retain them until « day when u court is 1p session and carry them into court aud open them und open ull of them, ‘Then the atutute declares, “Then = the contents thereot = suall be = pussed su pon,’! or ‘the | facts found whereot they are evidential,” oF | proceedings be disapproved or approved ‘or ef- fectuuted.” Would it occur to any ono thut such» stutute meant that the Clerk of the Court alone, or the Chiet Justice alone, Were to proceed to pass upon the papers or to find the facts of whien they were eviden- lal, oF to approve or disapprove ¢ Let me change the illustration. Suppose the coi the packet, 1m the instance suggested, were | summonses or wurraiits, uud the Sherif! wus wude the | custodian, ot and the law declared that he | should open them in court, and said, ‘and these writs snail then be’ served.’*’ How | should we know who Was to serve them? The appro- | priateness of the Sheri! would suggest him, but wt | would only suggest him. That is not the reason we | would know that the Sherif was to do it because the | Jaw declares that the Suertf shall serve all such writs {sun interested purty, and then the law de- mebody else shall do ti, But suppuse, iu this | iustance of Warrants or writs, the statute declared | “und the validity of the writ shall then bo passed upyn;” although the wo suppose thut the Shi todian ve the Sheriif suowld | itt was to doit? We should | kuow that the court was todo it Why? Because it | 1s judicial, and the law declares that judicial tunctions pertuin to the court. Mr. President, apply that rule to the case bolore us. We know tho nature of the possibe inquiries involved In the occasion, Comunittoes vave goue tar and wide toconductthem, My distinguished iriend from Wis- consin (Mr, Howe) has pained us by his absence lor weeks because deputed by the Senate in a distant State, Day alter duy laburiously he has been con- ducting them, I shall have occasion to show, if luo not weary the pavience of tho Sonate, that the framers of the constitution well knew and gravely pondered | the provlems which would arise for solution, My Present inquiry is whether the Presideut of the Senate 18 #0 equipped for setthng disputed questions of fact, is so endowed with facilities for solving problems like this, that reason | and intendment point to him alone us the tribunul. ‘The person having the largest number of yulea—of valid legal votes, be it a mayority, is to be the Presi- dent. The question is, Who sbail M11! the office uf Pres- ident? ‘The constitution bay named, ax I sald, ut least ve cases in which, although u majority of votes be given for a candidate, he shail not Mii the office of Vresivent—unless he be'a native born citizen; ov por. gon shall fill the office of President unless he has tained the of five und thirty years no person shalt fill the office of "Pres. ident unicss he has been fourteen years a resident of the country; no porsom shall Bil the oflice of Prosident chosen by the votes of electors who voted also for another person in the game State tor Vice President; no person shall fill the oltice of President who, having | been impeached vy tho grand inquest of the counuy, has been branded by the votes of two-thirds uf this body and immutably disqualified, WERE TO Hi EXCISED AND IY WHOM, ‘These questions may utise, Higher questions may arise. Hus the President of the Senate the power tu send for persons and pupers, to swear witnesses, to compel the surrender of telegrams and imprison | | witnesses af they will not give them up? | | Who bas that power? Who bad it when tue | constitution was made? Was there any | body who familiarly, im the two bermispheres, | had wicided such pow Yes, sir, the Britisa Par- liament for ages had been the power to judge of the election, qaaliications and returns of viticiula Tue State legisiatures on this Continent had done the sume thing. !tbad been customary jor the lords and com- mons to assemble in joint conlereace, and their rules of sixteen huudred and odd—l forget the exuct year— stand, I believe, yet. So, alter our constitution was | adjusted, it was customary for the Senate und | House to mect together to receive the Measace — or speech of the President of the United states, | ‘The two houses of Stuie Legislatures axsembled to- | gether; they do to-day familiarly, not only to elect Tegents of universities, not only to chouse Senators in | Congress, but to see opened, to canvass, to uscertain, to determine the count of votes und the results of elections, The bonvrable Senator trom Olio (Mr. Thurma) sits before me, und that reminds me ot a memory, in Which, if wrong, 1 bope he will. correct me. My recollection 18 that as early as 1802 the state of Obio bad 1 ity fundamental law the very words of our constitution; ~The presiding ollicer shall opea the certificates 1a the presence of the two houses and the votes shull then be counted.” 1s that iby Mr. THonmtax—Pretty uearly. Mr. Coxkiinc—In substance; and I ask the Senator | | from Ohio ww correct me if Lum wrong in saying that evon at that carly day, und always during ihe main- | j pstitution, It was the settled and im- | contesied understanding (hat the presiding vilicer | merely oponed the certiticutes, and that the two houses of the Legislature together proceeded to cout | oF canvass th Aim Urght ty touty { votes. hut 18 right as to the Governor. | ~The Chie Magistrate, Mr, Conktan ief Magistrate of the Stato; | and the Senator reminds me tail was unprecise ia | stating the officers to whom this provision appued, | Indeed I supposed it was to apply to all State oiticers. | Lusk, then, Whether the meu who employed the words, | “and’the votes shail then counted,” kuaw of a tribunal | or body having powers and faculties adequate to the | conduct of such a proceeding ¢ | THE TREK COUNT. | Tt has beon said that the count is a mere addition of | Units; therefore, that Ho uid Is Necessary except com- mon Lonesty and common sense, I do uvt uudersiand | the word to beso employed iu the constitution, | count may be of diferent Kinds, | isa ministerial act, and very simple. 1 papers is a ministerial which there may be counterte: true trom the faise 18 more than a mivistertal uct. | It requires judgment, It involves faculty, ‘to “open all the certificates . As my hon- orable Iriend from Vermont (Mr, Edmunds) suggests, | as a porter might open a bale of goods, so it 16 a | | purely minisserial act, But to count tho votes ts some. | | thing more, Why? *All the certticates” are to be opened, but not ail yotes are to be counted. The valid | | coustitutivnal voles and no other are w be counted, | dod Who counts (bem with tis tania his hand mast | | winnow the wheat from the chai, i To count my fingers ‘To count a pile If New York senus | | here 45 ciectoral vous, as they purport to be, thoy aro | not to be counted, bee ‘ew York 18 entitled to only | | 85 electorat arg to ve sorted, Tho | | bad and are to be sorted | | from the only the 35 true $ are to be counted, and they who | were intruders in tho cullege, or ignorantly added | | their names to the roll, did an act unauthorized and | | therefore void. If the certificate trom Marsachusosts | should show that the Votes were cast for the demu. | crauic candidates, the world kuows that Massachusetts | voted tor the republican nominees, und therelore the | Geriiticate 18 not to be blindly counted, nor counted at | ail without inquiry and veritication. If cectoral votes | ast tor Jaius Cusar—I mean Julius Carsar late of or for Harry the Kightt, of u Britisu subject, they ot to be counted without inquiry, Aud bere I am reminded of an tilustration of the difference berween these two kinds of counting, an Miustration by which | bave suffered myself, i it 1s possi bie to sufler in these times. In 1873 four electors of the State of Georgia voted tor Horace Greeley. What was the objection to that? Why should they hot voto for one of the most eminent men that ever belonged to one of the leading professions of the country? Why should they not vote for him for whoin ® great party had vowd in convention, who had been nominated also by those who wero not supposed to belong to any “healthful olitioul orga tion’’’ What was the diificuity? four electors had voted for Horace Greeiey, Was there any doubt that tbe electors were appointed? No, sir, Was there objection ww their elecuon! No, sir, Was not Georgia a State in the Union? Had not every propriety und every mandate been observed ? Yes, sis, But a Representative trom tho Stato of Massachusetts rose iu the meeting of the two houses and said:— object to the count of those votes. I object be- causo it 18 announced that Mr, Greeley was outed on uw 1¥ Ou Which these votes were cast."” ) tho | uttributes of sovereigns. | one of the Presidential candidates for or | ‘eavilteed Let me be moro explicit with the Senate in stating the process of the member who made tue objection, Fully translated his statement was this:— The certificate is blameloxs on its ince; there isa State bebind st—no euestion therc, But the news. the President of the Senate is the custodian of tbe | papers have announced that Mr. Groeley was baried certiticuics, upd 18 directed to open them, i may be | e ob such # day obody hag said that he was buried alive Therefore the presumption is that he wag dead, aud, i! dead that Gay, dead in that partof that same day Wherein those Votes were cast, The two houses separaed in toe (afr, House The honorable Seaater trom Vermont kd munds) propysed a resolution declaring thai votes sould not be counted, ‘The Senator trom Olio betore ine (Mr Thurman) moved to amend by striking out the word “sot,” which amendment pre- led. P then moved as au amendment 10 add to the which then declared that those four votes ireoley should be counted, words declaring al the two houses in counting the vores to be inmmisterial as distinguished trom the effect of that count or af those votes, So | huve read somewhere that | had expressed the opined thet counting any votes tn any sense within the power of the two houses was purely munietertas, Oh, no, Mr. President, 1 ofered au amendment to en- deavor to have the Senate expla thet when they said “votes for a dead wan shoutd be counted’ they meant merely that 1 wid be erfimerated; that they should be aunounced; that they should be added Up; nota vote tu the language of tho act of 1792 thas should undertake clare that a dews the oilice of Ir .t of the United amenain “nt encou Ja point of order, ruled (hut it was 19 order oaly to unswer thi yes or no, sail the yore be counted? while the House had cousidered, said the vote should vet be counted, was withheld from the memory of Mr. Greeley the tribate, if «tribute it would be, of having tour Votes trom Georgia, manually and arithmetically calculated ay having boen cast for him. Troterto this te distingaish, as L do in my own mind, betwe counting the chairs io the Senate ber und doing that which 1s tuvelved im the com. sUtutional direction touching the cloctora! votes. THE JUDICIAL QUESTION. Andee, | may say that the word ‘count’? does not govecu so much 4s the words ‘she votes.” Thit bower is not techn jadiewl, Why? Beeause the question does not arise in a judicial proceeding. It ts quasijudieul, [tas the power to judge, [tis the power by judgment wo affirm truth = and fact, The power to judge whether a bill shall pass or not is judicial, 11s not ministerial, Ln tuts case, Mr. President, 1 is political, Yoa, 0 i political “tt any ‘os the exercise of the very highest When Colorado is “reached, Suppose a member or Seuator rises and gays, “1 object to the votes of Colorado, because she 1s not a State io the Union.’ Ty the ease of Colorado there t¥ ne doubt but the question is the same ws if she were shrouded in doubl—the question Is shail her vote be counted ¥ objection Is that she is not w State im the Cnion, and the count or retusal to count that vote is the response to that questivn. No higher political question cau be solved or touched, Isshow State to law and im fact? Mr. President, nations bave fought over that quostion ior centuries. ‘A State to-morrow may stand under tho uphited ban+ hers of revolt. She may pass an ordinance of seces- sion, prostrate ull tho forms of government, make treaties with foreytn nations, seize the ports, arsenals, post ollices, custom houses. dock yards aud ships. of the nation, march an army into sister States, Shall her vote be counted ? It is no answer to say the law making power may fix her status in advance, ‘The law making power way | hot act, may bot have tine to act If the law making Power acts und her certiticate 18 here, the question 1, ghull her votes be couuted? and he who hag the power to decide that question may decide it as he lists; and the effect of what the !aw mukiog power bas done ta only a factor in the open question, VMUNDS—An indeterminate one at that on this an indeterminate one at hut on this theory, It is not proper tor ine, as | was about to do, to reler tc what may be dove in another legislative chamber. me suppose, Without an assertion, that a min formidabie in numbers, of the Law © Houxe of Representauves have repor 4 State; that she is inch r of ihe Union, ber stateno and some member of that | objection bere, Tho law making power bay acted, but the Senator irom Vermont may well guy 1b 18 Indeterminate, It the constitution reposes in you, sir, the prerogative and duty of deur mining Whut Votes shall be counted, who aro the mem- Vers of the sisterhood of states by whom the Cate! Magistrute ty to bo elected, Whether you might weukly loan upow the opinion of somevody clse, or nut, I will not consider; but you, und you alone, at frst aud at lust, are to’ solve that question, ed itd Wore to uccept what wus said by the Senator tr (Mr. Shertoan) this moratng 1 should begin aout iuyselt Whether my cherished friends trom Colorade are members of the Senate. I understood the seuawor trom Ohio to urgue twat the two houses by law canuot enact in advance that, on the happening of a ceria contingency, a certain legal verity and conciusioy should exist. He stated that most expietily if [une derstood bim. If that be true, awkward indeed would be the dilemma of Colorado, Congress, by an euabling act, authorized the then Territory of Cuiyrade to agsume statehood, provided 1 advance that, upoa tbe happening ol certain coutingencies, and proclaue: tion theroot to be tuade by the Pre-ident of the United Stutes, she should be crowned with statehood wah like force und effect us if she stood complete at the bour when the act spoke ‘The Presi dent has = m the — prvclamation evidential of that contingency, and by the uct of Congr spevking when tbe condition is complied with, Coloradg is to-day as complete iu her rigntwae & mumber of the Union axis the proudest or most ancient State in all the sisterhood, But my honorable friend from Obiv disputes the doctrine By which she 1a here, My houoradle irieud trem Unio contronts and combats the Supreme Court, because that court, loug years ago, uilirmed, in the embargo cuse, that suck legislation was entirely incompetent—incompetent, inconclusive, provisioual—uutil the happening of ao external coutingeney, and ripening aud becom‘ug et fectual then Mr. Evmcsxps—According to the judgment of the Presid of the United States, Mr. CoNKLING—And as my friend reminds mo again Most Frespectiully and so becoming according to the Judgment of the President of the Uuited States, Kul, Mr. President, | have wandered very tar from what I intended. [ineant somo time ago to say thas the scope and vastness of this power and of the ques- tious and possivilities it has evolved aro the measure of tho certainty and clear. ness with which it must be conferred, Loose intendments will not do, Loose intendinente may suillce tor paltry hes but be last quarter of the nineteenth century loose intendments will not suillce to convince 4,400,000 tree peuple that such transcendent powers ale vo be wielded by ope man, and tay be made to-day by a mere majority of vows jn this chamber aud unmade to-morrow by the change ot w single vote. REASON AND PITNESS. Mr. President, docs the reson, does the fitness o things inform us that our fathers intended that the | power to vitiate, on the allegation of traud or irregu lurity, the electoral votes of the States and thus turn the sale of Presidontial elections, was to be re. posed in one man as « sater and better repository thas ibe American people in Congress asgemblea? Duet reusun, dues the fitness of things select, from uw guage which turns away from the Presiden ot the seuate and drops him, the nie | that to that functionary alone, even if on n were selected, 1t Was designed ww commit thu ast power? Again, does reason suggest thus vur fathers in selecting onegnan to adjudye such questions, selecter him that might be the sole judge in bis own cause Six mes already has the Presideut of the Seuate beet inst Whom 4 Who wrote very mes proceeded im seven years to muke tue the count was to be made, Did our fathers, (bia instrument, wnticipate that? The who imade it { President of the seoaie thoir own successtul Presi dontiai candidate, and so We ure asked to believe that our futhes, profoundly zealous as their word# und acts, show they were of human greed and human am- bition, intended to make one than the sole judge whether he should mount the loftiest pinnacle of American, {not of human, ambition, The other aay we bad under consideration a constitutions amendment, committing to ping judges howd ing their commissions tor and as inde pendent of us as tho monarch of the skies, the count of the Presidential votes, and providing that not one of them should ever be eligible at a Presidential candidate until alter the lapse of years This is the inodern standard of safeguard against am A | bition; but we are asked to believe tuat our lathers, the trained men and the victims of abuses onder other systomns, decided to make one man the final supreme judge in bis own case, aithough divine luw aod Jjarisprudence have declared —siuce the morning of time thut no man eve shall be the judge in his own case, oven though he sits with other judges, and, as now iny oy falls upon my honorable triend irom New Jersey (Mr. Frelinghuysen), 1am reminded that the highest court in his Stace has recently decided that no act of the Legisiawure, no exercise of the legislative power ci constitute a inan, although he may sit with ovhers, 4 judge in hit own case, #0 enormous is the proceeding whon judged by common law, common ctures and common sense. Here we ure asked tou believe that io judge the framers of the constitution ime ty upon himn to become the party tntere cated. Nuy, they establish no period of probation, but they proceed with theit own hands to inake the so! judge, the party who may be interested, such Judge. We are asked to believe our futuet so intended, although by fraud or error be should wudo the nation’s wilt and overthrow the na tion's might, The American people im Congress am sembled (because in law ali are here—every State and every citizen is present, not two houses of Congress, oven though tn their presence luw and right and train should he overthrown,) could do anything but bow 1@ the presence of usurpation and of wrong. + THRBATENKD DANOERS, But wo aro warned that if it be held that the houses have this power the houses may baille the count; tey may throw out ono State and another State autil no mnwjority of all the clectors appointed remain. Yes; this 18 possible, Every page of the constitution pre- sents the mstances in which the two houses or one houve can prosirato the government, One house may Teluse to pass appropriation bills or tax bills oF army bills in war, ‘Tho States may refuse to appoint electors or may appoint incligibie electors, The cleo tors may refuse to vote or may vote for ineligible can: didates, The President of the United States muy re. Jue to receive certificates of refuse to open them, oF Tetuse even to produce them, ‘The Governel of tho State may retuso to certify or corti talsoly. The houses may and so on, It all proves notbing. son yave—<*The government resis on the cousent of the governed,’ So must every free government rest while it stands at all, and whenever reprosentatives id States aud people forsake the govcrament and ave it to languish and die it will go down, as otnos reruinents have gone, to the xupuichre of blasted tonalitics and buried epochs, y less to be trusted than one 8 Chamber in one hour may select President of tho Senate for the purpose, und the se eret purpose of ceciding a count and deciding it 1 one moe, Ia such creature of an hour a stronger anchor than Py sac of tho two houses of Congress? Prondent of the in tha Ore. 4 decision by Benato DMR RL ese ee eh. Rees een en eee a ee ee Oe ene eee ee nar cece ee eee ee eee eee NS