The Vote That Made the PresidentField, David Dudley
Philosophy
The Vote That Made the President
Field, David Dudley
Presidents -- United States -- Election -- 1876
"_Resolved further_, That the said committee" (the Committee on
Privileges and Elections) "be, and is hereby, instructed to inquire
into the eligibility to office under the Constitution of the United
States of any persons alleged to have been ineligible on the 7th
day of November last, or to be ineligible as electors of President
and Vice-President of the United States, to whom certificates of
election have been, or shall be, issued by the Executive authority
of any State, as such electors, and _whether the appointment of
electors_, or those claiming to be such, in any of the States, _has
been made either by force, fraud, or other means otherwise than in
conformity with the Constitution and laws of the United States, and
the laws of the respective States_; and whether any such
appointment or action of any such elector has been in any wise
unconstitutionally or unlawfully interfered with; and to inquire
and report whether Congress has any constitutional power, and, if
so, what and the extent thereof, in respect of the appointment of
or action of electors of President and Vice-President of the United
States, or over returns or certificates of votes of such electors,"
etc.
Was all this parade of committees sent hither and thither, summoning
witnesses from far and near, committing the recusant to prison, and
looking into State archives; was all this a mock show, a piece of
pantomime, for the amusement of the lookers-on, while conspirators were
plotting how to conceal what they pretended to be wishing to discover?
Taken all in all, the sounding profession, the bustling search, and the
studied concealment, make a drama, half comedy and half tragedy, the
like of which this generation has not seen till now, but the like of
which it and its successors may see many times, if the audience does not
hiss the play, and remit the actors to the streets.
It has been objected, as a reason for not receiving offered evidence,
that there was not time to take it before the 4th of March. How was that
known? Perhaps it could have been taken in an hour. Why was not the
question asked, how much time the evidence would take, before it was
excluded? If the certificate was false, and the falsehood was
susceptible of proof, every effort possible should have been made to
receive it, and receive it all. It is not commonly accepted as good
reason for not searching after the truth, that the search may be
difficult. Nor is it an unusual occurrence to require an argument or
decision to be made within a period limited. Ten minutes' speeches in
Congress, two hours' argument in the Supreme Court, a jury shut in a
room until they agree upon a verdict, a court required by statute to
render its decision by a day fixed, are not so strange as to be
remarkable, or found in practice so embarrassing as to cause the
practice to be abandoned.
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