ing from the electoral college votes of States lately in rebellion which shall not have been reorganized," it was provided that no electoral votes from any of the States lately in rebellion should be received or counted for President or Vice-President of the United States until, among other things, such State should have become entitled. to representation in Congress pursuant to acts of Congress in that behalf; therefore

Resolved, That, on the assembling of the two Houses on the second Wednesday of February, 1869, for the counting of the electoral votes for President and Vice-President, as provided by law and the joint rules, if the counting or omitting to count the electoral votes, if any, which may be presented as of the State of Georgia, shall not essentially change the result, in that case they shall be reported by the President of the Senate in the following manner: Were the votes presented as of the State of Georgia to be counted, the result would be, for - for President of the United States votes; if not counted, for - for President of the United States votes; but, in either case, is elected President of the United States; and in the same manner for VicePresident.

Mr. Hendricks, of Indiana, was the only senator who took an active part in the debate against this resolution; although Mr. Trumbull, of Illinois, expressed the opinion that it would be best to count the vote of Georgia and say nothing about it, and finally voted-alone among the Republicans—against the resolution. It was passed by the House of Representatives on the same day under a suspension of the rules. It is worth noting that three of the candidates on presidential tickets in 1884 — Messrs. Blaine, Logan, and Butler-voted in the affirmative in the House on the passage of this resolution, while a fourth- Mr. Hendricks- voted against it in

the Senate.

The count of the electoral votes took place on the 10th of February. It proceeded regularly until the votes of Louisiana were presented, when a member from Tennessee objected to them, under the twenty-second joint rule (see page 310), and the two Houses separated to consider the matter. Although no debate was in order, much time was consumed by the Senate in agreeing upon a form in which the decision of the question should be put. In the end the Senate voted to admit the votes by 51 to 7. The House promptly decided the question the same way by 137 to 63. The count was then resumed, and all the votes were opened and recorded, except

those of Georgia. On the presentation of the votes of that State, General Butler, of Massachusetts, arose and objected in writing to them on four distinct grounds: first, that the votes were not given on the day fixed by law, the electoral college of Georgia had met on the 9th instead of the 2d of December, 1868; secondly, because at the date of the election Georgia had not been admitted to representation in Congress; thirdly, because Georgia had not complied with the reconstruction acts; and, fourthly, because the election had not been fair and free. The question arose at once whether the concurrent resolution of the Senate and House, directing how the vote of Georgia should be treated, or the joint rule, was to govern. The presiding officer, Senator Wade, of Ohio, was at first inclined to hold the two Houses to the concurrent resolution; but, as the situation became complicated, he led the Senate back to its chamber.

The House of Representatives quickly decided, without debate, 150 to 41, that the vote of Georgia should not be counted. In the Senate there was a long and somewhat ungoverned discussion. Mr. Wade explained that the reason why he had yielded his first position in the joint meeting was that two of Mr. Butler's objections were not of the kind contemplated by the concurrent resolution directing how the votes of Georgia should be declared. Many propositions were made; and at last the Senate voted, by 28 votes against 25, "that, under the special order of the two Houses respecting the electoral vote from the State of Georgia, the objections made to the counting of the vote of the electors for the State of Georgia are not in order." The action of each House having been communicated to the other, the Senate returned to the Representatives' Hall. Then ensued one of the most remarkable and disgraceful scenes ever enacted in Congress. Mr. Wade, on taking the chair, remarked that the objections of the gentleman from Massachusetts had been overruled by the Senate, and that the vote would be announced according to the terms of the concurrent resolution. General Butler said that the House had sustained the objections, and proposed to offer a resolution, remarking, "I do not understand that we are to be overruled by the Senate in that way." The President of the Senate refused to entertain the resolution, and General Butler appealed from the decision of the chair. The President declined to entertain the appeal. A scene of indescribable disorder and confusion followed, several members speaking at

once, Mr. Butler distinguishing himself by the violence of his language, and, as General Garfield said in the debate which followed the joint meeting, by "a manner and bearing of unparalleled insolence." Some of his remarks were omitted in the revised version, which appears in the "Congressional Globe;" but they were referred to in the debate just mentioned. His last remark, as revised, is thus reported :

Mr. BUTLER, of Massachusetts: I move that this convention now be dissolved, and that the Senate have leave to retire. [Continued cries of "Order!' ""Order!"] And on that motion I demand a vote. [Cries of "Order!" "Order!" from various parts of the hall.] We certainly have the right to clear the hall of interlopers.

The presiding officer, not noticing these interruptions, proceeded to sum up the result, as directed by the concurrent resolution, and declared Grant and Colfax elected. The Senate then retired.

As soon as the House was by itself, Mr. Butler rose to a question of privilege, and offered a resolution that "the House protest that the counting of the vote of Georgia by the order of the Vice-President pro tempore was a gross act of oppression and an invasion of the rights and privileges of the House.' Upon this resolution a long and most acrimonious debate took place, which lasted three days. It contributed little or nothing to the settlement of the constitutional questions that have arisen in regard to the count of votes. The position of affairs was quite novel, and the gentlemen who took part in the debate seemed, without exception, to give hasty impressions rather than the result of careful study. The only point which was made clear was that the Constitution and the action of Congress left room for a variety of views, and that no member need be at a loss for precedents to sustain his own opinion. General Butler changed his resolution several times before a vote was taken. In one of its forms it proposed to abrogate the twenty-second joint rule, a proposition which was received with derision by many Republican members, who declared that it was not possible for one House to rescind a joint rule. Nevertheless, eight years later the Senate rescinded the same rule, and refused to be bound by it, although the House was then in favor of acting under it. General Butler's resolution, greatly toned down, and providing for the reference of the subject to a select committee, was at last brought to a vote, on a motion to lay it on the table, which was carried by 130 to 55, and the matter was dropped.

XXIV

THE GREELEY CAMPAIGN

THE reconstruction of the southern States had been substantially completed before the term of General Grant as President began. It remained for three States only to comply with the conditions already established. This they did soon afterward, and the legislation of the Forty-first Congress was accomplished, with every State in the Union fully represented. But the Southern question was not yet settled. The constitu tions of the re-admitted States contained guaranties of the right of the people to vote without distinction on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude; but, in effect, both the political and social rights of the colored people were much restricted. A state of terrorism existed in some parts of the South, where a secret organization known as the Ku-KluxKlan committed outrages upon the colored people, intended to intimidate them and to prevent them from voting. To defeat the schemes of those who endeavored by lawless acts to render the legislation of Congress nugatory, the act for the enforcement of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution, commonly known as the Ku-Klux Act, was passed. This measure, although it seemed necessary at the time, gave the Democrats an opportunity, which they were not slow to improve, to sneer at the inefficiency of a party which, with unlimited power, had not been able in five years since the war closed to finish its work with the South. Military force was constantly necessary to uphold the southern state governments, and the internal condition of some districts was sadly disturbed.

Beside the Southern question, there were others which now began to assume political importance. The first act signed by President Grant pledged the faith of the government to the payment of the interest-bearing bonds of the United States in coin, and to an early resumption of specie payments. For the time being, the opposition confined their attacks upon the financial system to the national banks. The annexation of Santo

Domingo to the United States was a favorite scheme with the President, and he did all that was in his power, both publicly and privately, to accomplish it. In the course of his negotiations to that end, and by other measures, he alienated the support of Mr. Sumner and of Horace Greeley, whose standing as Republicans and as public men was almost unique, and whose adhesion to the opposition in the ensuing canvass was deemed at the time to be most disastrous to the Republicans.

There was another issue, which had its origin at this time, which has since played an important part in congressional and presidential elections. The principle tersely expressed by Mr. Marcy to justify the wholesale removals from office practised by General Jackson, that "to the victors belong the spoils of the enemy," had been adopted by every Democratic and opposition administration which followed that of Jackson. On the accession of Mr. Lincoln, the Democratic officers were driven out and Republicans took their places, in every department of the government, from the foreign minister to the country postmaster. Mr. Johnson had been restrained from substituting Democrats for them all by the tenure-of-office act. General Grant found few Democrats to expel from public positions; but an evil which had grown up with that of a partisan civil service now took on alarming proportions. Certain gentlemen, usually one for each State, became practically recognized as dispensers of patronage within those States, and, by the exercise of the power which the virtual right to dismiss and appoint to office gave them, made themselves "bosses" and dictators of Republican politics in their respective States. The heads of the custom-houses, the post-offices, and other government offices were in many cases the servants of these bosses, and were forced to work in the interest of the personal fortunes of their protectors, and to employ the subordinates under them to promote the same object, all under the penalty of removal. Manipulation of the offices for private purposes developed a demand for a reform of the civil service, and emphasized the objections of many who had been sturdy Re publicans to the administration of General Grant.

The supporters of the administration were, however, neither few nor inactive. In addition to those who cordially approved the public acts of Grant, there were many others who were not prepared to abandon it on account of its mistakes. They set down some of the President's errors to his inexperience in