Page images
PDF
EPUB

APPENDIX A

DRAFT OF THE ADDRESS PREPARED FOR THE MINORITY OF THE ELECTORAL COMMISSION OF 1877.

BY THE HON. JOSIAH G. ABBOTT, LL.D.

To the People of the United States:

THE minority of the joint commission established by the act of Congress of Jan. 27, 1877, to decide questions arising in the count of the electoral votes, desire to address the people of the whole country on the subjects submitted to and decided by that commission.

No more important questions can ever come before any tribunal or people for consideration and determination. Upon their determination depends who shall be the President of this country, and whether he shall owe that great office to the free, honest choice of the people, or to bribery, forgery, and gross fraud.

The minority of that commission, by the law establishing it, had no opportunity of reporting the reasons for their action to the two Houses of Congress. The presence of a stenographer at these consultations was denied, so that no record thereof exists. No way is open to those who did not join in, but on the contrary protested against, the decisions of the commission, to make public their protest except by this address.

The returns of the electoral vote of four States - Florida, Louisiana, Oregon, and South Carolina - were submitted to and decided upon by the commission.

FLORIDA.

In the case of Florida there were three certificates. The first, signed by the Governor, certified that the four Hayes electors were elected according to the law of Florida and the acts of Congress. The second was signed by the Attorney-General, and the third by the Governor elected on the seventh of November last; and both certified the election of the Tilden electors. The Attorney-General was one of the three persons first canvassing the

votes.

To the third certificate were attached certified copies of all the returns of votes from every precinct in the State, which were originally made to the Secretary of the State, together with an act of the Legislature providing for a new canvass of the vote, according to the law as it had been decided by the Supreme Court, and the result of the new canvass thus ordered.

It was offered to be proved, and it was not denied that such was the fact, that by counting all the votes returned to the Secretary of State, according to the law of Florida as expounded by the Supreme Court, the Tilden electors had been duly elected.

It was offered to be proved, and was not denied, that the Tilden electors commenced proceedings in quo warranto against the Hayes electors in the court of that State having jurisdiction by its constitution, notice of which was served on the latter before they gave their votes, and as soon as they were declared elected, and which was prosecuted to this judgment - that the Hayes electors had not been elected and had no title to the office, but that the Tilden electors had been legally elected and were entitled to the office.

[ocr errors]

It was offered to be proved, and was not denied, that the two canvassers who had made the certificate of election of the Hayes electors, which by the law of Florida was made only prima facie evidence, had erred in their construction of the law and exceeded their jurisdiction by so doing, in their canvass of votes on which the certificate was based.

Thus it was offered to be proved, and the facts were not denied, that the Governor's certificate given to the Hayes electors was false, and that the determination and certificate of two of the three who made up the Board of Canvassers was false in fact and in violation of the laws of Florida, and that in making it the two had exceeded their jurisdiction. It was offered to be proved that the Supreme Court of Florida had, in effect, decided that the two canvassers had made a false certificate and exceeded their jurisdiction, and that the Circuit Court had so decided. It was offered to be proved that both the Legislature and the executive of the State had so determined, and had attempted by all means in their power to prevent the State being defrauded of its true and real vote.

The majority of the commission decided that the determination and certificate of two of a board of three canvassers, with ministerial powers only, and which by law was prima facie, not conclusive, evidence, must stand and decide the great question of the presidency, although it could clearly be proved to be false in fact, and that in making it the two canvassers had exceeded their jurisdiction and authority, as held by the Supreme Court of the State, and although the Legislature and Governor had both declared it false, and that by giving effect to it the State would be defrauded of its true and real vote; and although the electors, in whose favor it was made, had been declared by the courts not to have been elected. The injustice of this decision was the more marked and flagrant by contrast. All the State officers, from the Governor down, who were voted for on the same ticket with the Tilden electors, and had been counted out by the same two canvassers, at the same time, and by the same canvass by which the latter were counted out, had been declared elected by the action of the highest court of the State, and are now and have been holding their several offices to the general contentment of the citizens of Florida. But the Hayes electors alone are permitted by this decision to consummate the wrong, and act in offices to which they were never elected.

Against this decision of the commission the undersigned protested and now protest as wrong in law, bad in morals, and worse in the consequences which it entails on a great country.

It gives absolute power to two inferior ministerial officers to withhold their determination till the day when the electoral vote is cast, as was done in this case, and then give the vote of a State to a candidate who has never received it, as was done in this case, and tells the people there is no redress for such an outrage.

It is a decision admirably calculated to encourage fraud, and ensure its being perpetrated with success and impunity.

It is a decision by which the people of a State may be defrauded and robbed of their dearest rights by a few unprincipled wretches, and be then compelled to acquiesce in the great wrong.

It is a decision claimed to be based on the doctrine of State rights, but, in fact, is in direct conflict with that great doctrine, for by it States and the peoples of States can be stripped of their rights and liberties, with no power to resist.

We protest against the decision finally because by it the people of the whole United States are defrauded and cheated; because by it a person is put into the great office of President, who has never been chosen according to the Constitution and law, and whose only title depends on the false and fraudulent certificate of two men in the State of Florida, instead of a majority of the legal voices of the whole people, declared through and by their electoral colleges.

LOUISIANA.

In the case of Louisiana, the decision of a majority of the commission is a stupendous wrong to the people of that State, and all the other States, and in defiance of all right, justice, law, and fair dealing among men.

The law of that State establishes a Returning Board to consist of five persons of different parties, with power to fill vacancies, and to canvass and compile the returns of votes from the different parishes and precincts, and declare the result. The board is given power and jurisdiction -- provided affidavits are annexed to and received with the return from any precinct or parish to inquire whether intimidation has existed, and if it is established to throw out the return for such parish; but this jurisdiction is carefully confined to cases where affidavits are attached to and returned with the returns of the votes; in no other case whatsoever is the power to reject votes given.

It was offered to be proved, and was not denied, that the board giving the certificate to the Hayes electors consisted of four persons all of the Republican party - instead of five persons of different parties, as required by law; that these four members had been requested and required by Democrats to fill the vacancy with a Democrat, but had uniformly refused to do so.

It was offered to be proved, also, that this board of four persons all of

the Republican party in order to perpetrate the frauds with ease and impunity, employed five disreputable persons as clerks and assistants, all of whom had been convicted, or were under indictment, for various offences, ranging from subornation of perjury up to murder. ment, at least, if not conviction, seemed the only admitted qualification of employment by that extraordinary board.

Indict

It was offered to be proved, and was not denied, that this board, in order to give the certificate of election to the Hayes electors, had rejected ten thousand votes, and this was done, although not a return thrown out had been accompanied by the requisite affidavit to give jurisdiction to act at all. It was offered to be proved that the members of this Returning Board, in order to give the certificate of election to the Hayes electors, had resorted to and used affidavits known by them to be false and forged, had themselves been guilty of forgery, and had been paid for making their determination, thus adding bribery to the catalogue of their crimes.

Numerous other corrupt and fraudulent practices were offered to be proved against the members of this Returning Board, among the least of which was a wicked conspiracy to rob the people of Louisiana of their rights and liberties.

The decision of a majority of the commission rejected all this evidence, and held that the certificate of election given to the Hayes electors must stand, and could not be inquired into, if all such offers of proof could be substantiated.

By that decision the people of the United States are told that the certifi cate of a board constituted in direct defiance of the law establishing it, and made by grasping a jurisdiction never granted to it, arrived at by forgery, perjury, wicked conspiracy, and the grossest frauds, and finally bought and paid for, must stand, and cannot be set aside; and although steeped in sin and iniquity, it must make the chief magistrate of a great, free, and intelligent people.

The undersigned protest against this decision, also, as bad in law, worse in morals, and absolutely ruinous in its consequences.

They denounce it in the presence of the people of the United States, and in the face of the world, because, if intended and designed for such a purpose, it could not have been more cunningly contrived than it is to encourage the grossest frauds, conspiracies, and corruptions in the election of a President.

They denounce it, because it will debase the national character, deaden the public conscience, and encourage fraud and corruption in all the public and private transactions and business of the people.

They denounce it, because for the first time it declares to the people that by their organic law, the Constitution, it is ordained that a man may seek for, obtain, and hold this great office of chief magistrate of two and forty millions of freemen by fraud and cheating.

Nay, more, that he may openly buy the votes to elect himself, and pay down the price when the purchase is consummated by the count by the two

Houses of Congress, and call them to witness the payment; and that there is no help for it but revolution.

They denounce it, because, in effect, it puts up the great office of Presi dent at auction, and says to the whole world that it may be bought in safety, and that there is no way known to man by which the title by purchase can be disputed or gainsaid.

OREGON.

In the Oregon case, a certificate signed by the Governor and Secretary of State, and under the great seal of the State, certified to the election of two Hayes and one Tilden elector. The three Hayes electors produced no certification of election signed by any person-only a certificate of certain results from which it was claimed that it could be inferred who were elected. The law of Oregon required a list of the persons elected to be signed by the Governor and Secretary of State, under the great seal, and this requirement, as well as that of the acts of Congress, was fully met and satisfied by the first certificate. There was no certificate in the second case in any manner complying with the laws of Oregon or the acts of Congress. Yet by the decision of the commission the first certificate was rejected and the second taken, although clearly neither in conformity with State or Federal law.

The undersigned voted against counting the vote of the Tilden elector, because, notwithstanding the certificate of the Governor and Secretary of State, they were satisfied he had not been elected by the people of Oregon, and that his vote would not have been the true vote of that State.

The majority of the commission decided to set aside and reject the certificate and return, precisely the same in character that they had holden to be conclusive against all evidence in the Florida and Louisiana cases. They adopted and acted on a certificate insufficient if they regarded their former rulings, under any law, State or National.

The undersigned denounce the Oregon decision as utterly at war with and reversing the rule established in the two former cases, and because it changes the law to meet the wants of the case, establishing different rules applicable to the same facts to bring about a desired result.

In the Florida case, where the evidence failed to establish the fact, the majority of the commission voted to receive evidence to prove one elector held an office of profit and trust under the United States when appointed. In the Louisiana case, where there was no doubt that two electors held such offices when appointed, it was voted not to receive evidence of the fact, because it was not offered to be proved that they continued to hold such offices where they voted.

Apparently, the rules change as the requirements of the case change. VOL. II.-23

« PreviousContinue »