The Electoral Votes of 1876: Who Should Count Them, What Should Be Counted, and the Remedy for a Wrong CountField, David Dudley
History
The Electoral Votes of 1876: Who Should Count Them, What Should Be Counted, and the Remedy for a Wrong Count
Field, David Dudley
Presidents -- United States -- Election -- 1876
former is not to count the votes, the two Houses must.
The meaning which is thus supposed to be the natural one has been
sanctioned by the legislative and executive departments of the
Government, and established by a usage, virtually unbroken, from the
foundation of the Government to the present year.
The exhaustive publication on the Presidential Counts, just made by
the Messrs. Appleton, leaves little to be said on this head.
The sole exception suggested, in respect to the usage, is the
resolution of 1789, but that is not really an exception. We have not
the text of the resolution. We know, however, that there was nothing
to be done but adding a few figures. There was no dispute about a
single vote, as all the world knew. But taking the resolution to have
been what the references to it in the proceedings of the two Houses
would imply, it meant only that a President should be chosen for that
occasion only. The purpose was not to define the functions of any
officer or body, but to go through the _ceremony_ of announcing what
was already known, and to set the government going. No decisions
between existing parties were to be made; no selection of true votes
from false votes, but only an addition of numbers. Individual members
of Congress have undoubtedly in a few instances expressed different
views, but these members have been few, and they have always been in a
hopeless minority. If any one can read the debates, the bills passed
at different times through one House or the other, the joint
resolutions adopted, and the accounts of the votes from time to time
received or rejected, and doubt that the two Houses of Congress have
asserted and maintained, from 1793 until now, their right to accept or
reject the votes of States, and of individual electors of States, all
that I can say is, that he must have a marvelous capacity of doubting.
He must ignore uniform practice as an exponent of constitutions, and
set up his individual misreading of words, reasonably plain in
themselves, against the opinions of almost all who have gone before
him.
The joint resolution of 1865 is of itself decisive, if a solemn
determination of the two Houses of Congress, approved by the
President, can decide anything. That resolution was in these words:
"_Whereas_, The inhabitants and local authorities of the States
of Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida,
Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Texas, Arkansas, and Tennessee,
rebelled against the Government of the United States, and were in
such condition on the 8th day of November, 1864, that no valid
election of electors for President and Vice-President of the
United States, according to the Constitution and laws thereof,
was held therein on said day: therefore--
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account