216 



CONGRESS, UNITED STATES. 



would in a great measure so remain), what 

 would be the effect of a State return? Would 

 it be prima facie or conclusive evidence of its 

 correctness? Or suppose some States decide 

 to provide machinery for the adjustment of 

 electoral contests and others do not. You 

 have no power to enforce your wishes in this 

 matter. You would be compelled to adopt 

 two distinct rules in regard to the same kind 

 of returns. If one State shall follow the sug- 

 gestion of the law and constitute a tribunal 

 prior to the time fixed for the counting of the 

 electoral votes, and if there should be a trial 

 and a determination to settle that question, I 

 presume when the latter return came here it 

 would be accepted under the provisions of tbis 

 law as conclusive. But suppose that the State 

 did not, relying upon the law as it now stands 

 and the laws throughout the Union are gen- 

 erally satisfactory on that subject, and simply 

 comply with the act of 1792 and certified 

 only the title of tbe electors, what then ? In 

 the one case I presume the record would be 

 conclusive evidence that they were the elec- 

 tors, and in the other it would be only prima 

 facie evidence. Unless you have the power 

 to enforce this uniform rule and make it 

 applicable to all States, I think you will find 

 great difficulty in carrying out this part of it.' 



" Notwithstanding all that has been said in 

 favor of this bill as a State-rights measure, it 

 gives to Congress a power over the election 

 of President which in my judgment is most 

 dangerous. It was the observation of a very 

 wise man on this floor that there is very little 

 difference between leaving the presidential 

 election to Congress and leaving Congress to 

 decide that election. The sixth section of this 

 bill gives Congress the power to set aside the 

 vote of any State in this Union if one Senator 

 and one Representative can be found to object 

 to it. This is stating it pretty broadly, but the 

 power is there. I know it is not a legitimate 

 argument to argue against the existence of 

 power from the abuse of it; but on questions 

 of this kind all experience teaches us that 

 whenever Congress is called to act it will act 

 in a party spirit. Unfortunately for the coun- 

 try, unfortunately for all, it will be impossible 

 to obtain any decision by Congress, in my 

 judgment, on a question of this kind, into 

 which party spirit will not enter. That is the 

 great danger in the whole business. Am I to 

 be told that the party majority in Congress 

 will always be wise, moderate, and just, and 

 that there is no danger from usurpation and 

 passion ? Give to one Senator and one Repre- 

 sentative the power to set in motion this Con- 

 gressional machinery against the electoral votes 

 of the States, and I believe, sir, that the time 

 is not far distant when it will prove to be the 

 most dangerous delegation of authority ever 

 conferred upon two men. 



" There are many other objections that I 

 could make to this bill ; but I conceive that it 

 is most important in the view that I take of 



the meaning of the Constitution, and the prac- 

 tice under it, that there should be no outstand- 

 ing contest over the electors after election-day 

 if it can be possibly avoided ; that the Consti- 

 tution in requiring the electors to be selected 

 on a given day, and placing that time under 

 the control of the General Government, clear- 

 ly indicates what the purpose was in regard to 

 it. It was that everything appertaining to 

 or connected with the election of the electors 

 should be settled upon that day. After the 

 first Tuesday in October the election is over, 

 but you have a contest in Florida, in North 

 Carolina, in Kentucky, it may be in New 

 York; and no living man would be able to 

 say what will be the decision of those local 

 tribunals to whose judgments, under this bill, 

 the main question is submitted. The election 

 has settled nothing; it has brought a contro- 

 versy into existence, which in its progress, as 

 I said a while ago, may involve the very foun- 

 dations of the Government, for the reason I 

 have assigned." 



Mr. Eaton of Connecticut : " Mr. President, I 

 agree with other Senators who say that this is 

 a grave question. I hope I am second to no 

 man in this body in my desire for peace and 

 good order and love for the Constitution. I 

 am opposed to the passage of this bill. I am 

 opposed to the passage of any such bill. I 

 say, sir, here, that in my judgment there can 

 be constitutionally no legislation upon this sub- 

 ject. There ought not to be any legislation 

 upon this subject. There ought to be no inter- 

 position by Congress between the States and 

 the Constitution. If the Constitution of the 

 United States is defective, amend it, not tinker 

 with it by legislation. I am not prepared to 

 say that any amendment is required ; but, if it 

 is required, let the people of the country deter- 

 mine what the organic law shall be, and not 

 this Congress of the United States. 



" I said, sir, that there could not be, there 

 ought not to be, any interposition between the 

 Constitution and the States. The principle of 

 legislation is vicious, and why? This instru- 

 ment undertakes to and I believe does deter- 

 mine exactly what the power of the States is 

 in this matter. Is any legislation required ? 

 What is necessary to constitute legislation? 

 To legislate successfully requires the assent of 

 the President of the United States, or a two- 

 thirds vote of each House of Congress over his 

 veto. Can this principle be adopted in this 

 case ? Is this principle wise ? What has the 

 Executive of the United States under the Con- 

 stitution to do with this matter? Does the 

 Constitution give him over this subject any 

 power ? You seek now to pass a bill, and ask 

 the Executive of the United States to sign that 

 bill, and that bill to govern, gentlemen say not 

 the States, but the action of the States under 

 the organic law of the land. Sir, let us read 

 tbis clause of the Constitution : 



" The electors shall meet in their respective States 

 and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, 



