"It has been exercised, and has been recognized and submitted to as lawful, on every hand. That machinery would probably elect Mr. Tilden President and Mr. Wheeler Vice-President. That would be right enough, for the law provides that in a failure to elect duly by the people, the House shall immediately elect the President, and the Senate the Vice-President. Some tribunal must decide whether the people have duly elected a President. I presume, of course, that it is in the joint affirmative action of the Senate and House, or why are they present to witness the count if not to see that it is fair and just? If a failure to agree arises between the two bodies there can be no lawful affirmative decision that the people have elected a President, and the House must then proceed to act, not the Senate. The Senate elects Vice-Presidents, not Presidents. Doubtless, in case of a failure by the House to elect a President by the 4th of March the President of the Senate (if there be one) would be the legitimate person to exercise Presidential authority for the time being, or until the appearance of a lawful President, or for the time laid down in the Constitution. Such course would be peaceful, and, I have a firm belief, lawful. "I have no doubt Governor Hayes would make an excellent President. I have met him, know of him. For a brief period he served under my command, but as the matter stands I can't see any likelihood of his being duly declared elected by the people unless the Senate and House come to be in accord as to the fact; and the House would, of course, not _otherwise_ elect him. What the people want is a peaceful determination of this matter, as fair a determination as possible, and a lawful one. No other administration could stand the test. The country, if not plunged into revolution, would become poorer day by day, business would languish, and our bonds would come home to find a depreciated market. "I was not in favor of the military action in South Carolina recently, and if Genl. Ruger had telegraphed to me or asked for advice, I would have advised him not under any circumstances to allow himself or his troops to determine who were the lawful members of a State Legislature. I could not have given him better advice than to refer him to the special message of the President in the case of Louisiana some time before. "But in South Carolina he had had the question settled by a decision of the Supreme Court of the State--the highest tribunal which had acted on the question--so that his line of duty seemed even to be clearer than the action in the Louisiana case. If the Federal court had interfered and overruled the decision of the State court there might have been a doubt certainly, but the Federal court only interfered to complicate, not to decide or overrule.