OCR Text |
Show THE COMMISSION. Closing Arcnuiciiffl ! i;v:'( ttutl CiuiipbeW. WltDNIDAY's aKSSlON, CONCLUDED. : Washington, 14. Shellebarjier closed the dehalo before tho com mission mis-sion tG-nigut for the rtrpuhlieana. Alter a dismission of the acts of the Louiaiana IcHinliUuro and their clt'tct, elfiimint; that Hie action of tho returning re-turning hoard was legal and valid; that congress had recognized tho Kellogg government, ho contended that the electors objected to wero eligible, and that it i not competent lor the commission te go behind tho action of the returning board lor the purpose- of finding out what happened in itd exercise ol the jurisdiction bestowed be-stowed by the statute. He concluded hisppeecli by a violent partisan har-rangue, har-rangue, at the close of which the commission adjourned till to morrow. Thursday's session. Washington, 15. Evarls continued the argument on tho republican aide this morning. He contended that the right to cast its votea rested in the state and was not a grant from : the general government. Whatever power the federal government possessed posses-sed it held through the federal constitution. consti-tution. Tho ninth aod tenth articles of the amendments reserved in leriua to the states all tho rights not specifically specifi-cally delegated. The whole matter ol selecting electors, determining the modu and issuing the certiticateB belonged be-longed to the state. It was lor tho lederal government to count the votes after Lhey had left the state. Ab iu the Florida case so bore this body had tho powor of the two houses to count the vote the power Granted to those bodies by the constitution, but not the power of leeislation. Considering the power posseted by the commiBsion Evarta charged that the other side had changed its posi liun. holding iu the Florida case that it lmd judicial authority to institute quo warranto proceedings, and now declaring that its duties were legislative. legisla-tive. He contended that the power vested in the body wus&uch as existed in the two houses for the performance of the specified duty to count the electoral votes, not to vote for electors, elec-tors, for the two houses did not possces that power. In regard to tho ineligibility of Brewster and Levissee, tho sUtulo prescribed that they should be waitod for and it they did not appear until o'clock, the vacancies were to be liUcd by the remaining electors. They did not appear and the vacancies were declared and filled by the selcctiou of theee same men to Gil the vacancy that their title to the office of elector was to be judged. There was nothing in tho oilers ol proof on the other sid e that detracted from the right of the governor to certify the election. He felt relieved of any necessity to prove that Kellogg was de facto governor, for iu the first proposition the other side offer to prove that through the months of October, November and December. There was no proof that Brewster and Levi;; see were not qualified to receive an election on the Gth of December. It was also among the offers ol proof that the Kellogg certificate was by the dc facto governor gover-nor of the s'.ate, and this certificate shows lor whom the votes were legally cast. Btfftr approaching ihe question ques-tion whether the evidence submitted submit-ted could be received, it would be first necessary to examine what the law of Louisiana was. The session ses-sion law of 1S05 contained two independent inde-pendent acts on independent subjects First, relative toelections in Louisiana and to enforce article J03 of the constitution con-stitution of the state. Tiiii was a general election law; thee there was another act ralalive to presidential electors. Theso two acts governed the election in 1S7G, unless lhey were subsequently repealed, which they were not. Evarta here read a provision in the latter act providing provid-ing lor the lillitig of the vacancies if the electors did not appear before be-fore four o'clock, by subsequent legislation. legis-lation. Tho canvassing suction was repealed, but all the rest of the act was left standing. In 1S70 there was a revision of the laws of the state, not a repeal ol the laws nor an amendment amend-ment of them, but a codification as Uas been recently made by congress. He referred in the revised statutes to ' the following acts of 1S0S to show j that they bad been incorporated in the statutes aa revised. Hq then read 1 the sesiion law of 1875, passed March ! 10th. and maintained, as it made no! provision for tho discharge of their duties by the electors, it did not by the terms ot its repealing clause repeal re-peal the act of 1SC3 as incorporated in the revised statutes, so far as that act related to the discharge of their duties. EvarU'said that not one of the eminent emi-nent lawyers wLohad visited New Orleans Or-leans during November ever thought to suggest that Governor Kellogg ought to count tho vote, which tvaj now the construction sought to he put upon the siatuto of the state. He argued against tho authority of ; congress to interfere in tho atl'iirs of a slate, and said: Our forefathers were bo jealous of federal power that they would not permit the interference of the federal linger at a state election, and forbade tho aclion of tho federal officers, but now it was thought to thrust tho thickness of a man's loins upon the power of the state by an inquiry in-quiry through this commission into tho election in a state. Ho denounced it as a monstrous preposition. Their position iu the Florida ca3e was unchanged. un-changed. Iu the absence of the necessary ne-cessary legislation there could not be a revision ef the count. He took the claim of tho McEnery electors and Baid that acting without color or show of authority, neither McEnery or the electors having been inducted into office, their action was wholly void. In support of this proposition he cited numerous authorities. On the other hand, suppose Brewster and Leviasee had been ineligible, there was a color and show of authority, and tho state was not to be deprived of an act which it approved by au objection raised at tne moment ot counting the votes. In s reply to the argument "of Trumbull, " that Brewster and Leviasee being ineligible, in-eligible, but six elector! were elected, and hence there were no vacancies, in the other caseB, Evarls contended , tual the office must bo filled or there must bz a vacancy. There could he 1 no such thing us a vacancy that was not vacant. As t tho federal duijiul-ilicalion, duijiul-ilicalion, there was no evidence ollcred that touched the point, and it' thore was it would be inadmissible as to a state disqualification. He argued that an elector whh not an officer, but that the term applied in like manner as the primary application of tho word elector to a voter at the polls. Evarteaaid he had no desire to appeal to partisanship. Ho desired to pro-9 pro-9 tent this cmbb as an American citizen. Ho wanted the wrongs in Louisiana that had so long been perpetrated remedied, but wanted them remedied by law. Ho vividly pictured the condition con-dition of affairs in that state, aud said it was not a slate of aflnirs to be smiled at, whichever side the smile j camo from. An attempt was made 1 by putting into tho constitution pro- j visions fothe support of good government, govern-ment, aud the legislature undertook to carry out tho provisions ; it was by the means adopted that the state was savel from civil strife and anarchy. The decision in the Florida case to inquire whether tho returning board acted without jurisdiction covered every point in the present cas. Thurman said it might bo that a majority of the commission had thought that the law of Florida aulhor-ized aulhor-ized the board to do what was done, which might not be tho case in Louisiana. Evarts said h could not kuow that, buf he was following tho arguments of O'Conor, who had notdenied that if tho inquiry was extended to the act oi me returning Doaru ii cuum uj every precinct poll, but if it was icund that the commission was gettiug too far to sea it could swim ashore, drowning whichever candidate the depth of water at that poiut was against. If the work could not be thoroughly done it had better bejeft undone. Suppose it had been provided pro-vided that the governor was the person per-son to ca3t the electoral vote of the stat p "would this commission inquire into the mode by which that governor was elected; would it Btop to inquire whether he was a parly to a conspiracy con-spiracy to deprive the people of their votos. Certainly not; it would be enough to know that he was de facto governor of the state, and the same rul applied. Here Evarls closed with an earnest defense of the blacks ol Louisiana, saying it was proposed to make them the victims ol tho canstitution. for the constitution constitu-tion gave them the gift of suflrage, , and they were now to be slaughtered for having it in their possession. E?arU closed at 1. TO, and occupied all the lime allotted to his side, and ou motion of Thurman the commission commis-sion took a recess. After recess Judge Clifford announced an-nounced that the republican side had consumed its time and that two and one-half hours remained to the other side. Judge Campbell then proceeded to close for the defense. He did not understand that the procidentia! electors elec-tors owed their existence to the constitution con-stitution of any slate, but that thev derived their power from the people ot the United States, which were United States under the confederation and before the constitution was adopted, which was, iu ila own language, lan-guage, to form a more perfect union. |