Part 10

"We can conceive of no reason why the Constitution required the electors to make and sign and certify lists of the votes which they gave, excepting that it was required in order to give legal verity to the contents of the certificates. For the same reason we hold that to 'count the votes' so certified does not import or imply a power to inquire into the legality, sufficiency, or regularity of the appointment of the electors whose appointment is duly certified by the State authorities whose duty it is to give to the two Houses of Congress legal information of that appointment. It will never do, in our judgment, to draw analogies for the government of this matter from the practice of legislative bodies in judging of the rights of their members to seats. That practice rests upon an express constitutional provision; and it is from that express power to determine the legality of an election that their whole authority to go behind the certificate of a sitting member is derived.

"But these Electoral Colleges are peculiar bodies, whose appointment is committed wholly to the States, whose certificates, when their official character has been duly vouched by their States, become by force of the Constitution the sole and exclusive legal evidence that the votes of those States have been cast for such and such persons as President and Vice-President. It cannot be, therefore, that any authority can reside anywhere to try any question, or to find any fact, that is to warrant the two Houses in rejecting the votes of any Electoral College of whose authority to give those votes the State, through its constituted authorities, has legally informed Congress. All such questions and all such facts belong to the proper authorities of each State to try and determine before the persons supposed to be chosen electors are assembled to give their votes. Any attempt by the two Houses, or either of them, to go behind the certificates and to determine the right of the electors to give the votes which they have certified, when the State has determined that right by its competent authorities, will lead to conclusions in which the people of this country will not acquiesce.

"Thus, if it shall be found on an inspection of the certificates of the Electoral Colleges, when they are opened in the presence of the two Houses, that Mr. Hayes has received 185 votes, or more, that result must be accepted by the people as the legal result, whatever may have been the frauds committed in Louisiana or any other State in taking or returning or counting the popular vote. It is perfectly proper for Congress to ascertain the fact of such frauds in an authoritative and conclusive manner for the information of the people, but the certainty that there are such frauds cannot affect the legally certified election. Mr. Hayes must be inaugurated and acknowledged as President, even if the legal result is so tainted with fraud that honest men revolt at the very thought they must submit to. There is no alternative but civil war; and that forms an unnecessary and inadequate remedy, and is not to be thought of. If Hayes shall be declared President, with grave reason to believe that he has not been honestly and fairly entitled to have the electoral votes of certain States, he and his party must bear the consequences. Those consequences, if his opponents are wise, will be, not that his title to the office is to be resisted, but that the people are to be appealed to to use their constitutional and peaceful methods of redressing all wrongs and punishing all outrages--namely, by the ballot-box. No such appeal can be made if the country is to be plunged into anarchy by denying Hayes' title to the office. Our government must be preserved and perpetuated; and that it may be, grievous as the wrong will be that takes from Tilden States in which he has certainly carried a majority of the popular vote, we must submit to that wrong, in the entire certainty that the party responsible for it will in due time be rewarded with political annihilation.

"We shall therefore deprecate and oppose any action by the House of Representatives looking to any dispute of the regular electoral certificates from any of the States. The responsibility for what is done in the three controverted States is with the Republicans, and there let it rest. All that the House of Representatives can properly do in the premises is to ascertain and determine the precise nature, methods, and extent of the frauds, and then leave the question to the judgment of the country, and to the legal and constitutional remedy afforded by the next elections."

SAML. WARD TO TILDEN

(WANTS GOVERNOR TO ASSIST EVARTS IN UNVEILING STATUE OF DANIEL WEBSTER)

_"Private._

"BREVOORT HOUSE, _24th Nov., 1876_.

"DEAR MR. PRESIDENT-ELECT,--A cat may look at a king, and an old fossil like myself may offer a suggestion to a much wiser man.

"I humbly suggest that you assist at Evarts' oration to-morrow, upon the unveiling of the Webster statue in Central Park.

"If he meditates mischief your presence will check him, and if he intends preaching from the Constitution it will encourage him. If he carries out the doctrine of State-rights as against Conkling's speech of last winter, he covertly justifies nullification and secession.

"Yours faithfully, "SAML. WARD.

"_His Excellency Governor Tilden, President-elect._"

WM. P. CRAIGHILL TO G. W. MORGAN

"BALTO., MD., _Nov. 24, 1876_.

"DEAR GENERAL,--Now is a time, it seems to me, when every true lover of our country will desire to do all he can to allay excitement and to reach an honest and fair conclusion upon the question about which all are thinking--Who ought to be the next President? I believe a great majority of the American people, North and South, desire peace and quiet, as well as an honest decision on that question; but there are, unfortunately, some in both sections, and perhaps in Congress, who have nothing to lose and may gain something by turmoil, strife, and excitement.

"When the pot boils much froth and scum rise to the surface, which otherwise might never be known to exist.

"It appears to me the _crisis_ will be upon us when the two Houses of Congress meet to count or see counted the electoral votes. Disputes must arise about many questions, by reason of the complications now surrounding the situation. Who shall decide between them? The great want is a tribunal to whom may be referred at once, _without debate_ or excitement, all disputed points. This tribunal should not only be honest and impartial and able, but the Congress and the people should _believe_ so. Could not such a tribunal be organized _before the dispute begins_? It might be extraconstitutional, but its decrees could be made binding in this particular case by consent of all concerned.

"Let Congress request Mr. Tilden to select the chief judge in his State or in New Jersey or Virginia, and let Mr. Hayes take the chief judge of Ohio or Pennsylvania or Illinois or Massachusetts; let these two be joined by the Chief Justice of the U. S. as a third member.

"The last named has never been a violent partisan, and is specially acceptable to the bar in Richmond, Virginia, and elsewhere in the South. Let this tribunal decide all disputed points in accordance with the Constitution and precedents, as far as applicable, by common law and common-sense. Let their judgment be final and conclusive. By such a course justice would be done and all parties satisfied.

"Very truly yours, "WM. P. CRAIGHILL.

"_Gen'l Geo. W. Morgan, "Mount Vernon, Ohio._"

G. W. MORGAN TO TILDEN

"MOUNT VERNON, OHIO, _Nov. 27, 1876_.

"MY DEAR MR. PRESIDENT,--Colonel Wm. P. Craighill, the writer of the inclosed, is an officer of the Engineer Corps, and is one of the finest and ablest men in our military service. He does not dream that you would see his letter, but I deem it proper to submit it for your consideration.

"I remain, Mr. President, with great respect,

"Your very obedient servant, "G. W. MORGAN.

"_His Excellency Samuel J. Tilden._"

CERTIFICATE OF THE ELECTORAL VOTE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK IN 1876

"STATE OF NEW YORK, _ss._:

"We, the Secretary of State, Comptroller, Treasurer, and Attorney-General of the said State having formed a Board of State Canvassers, and having canvassed and estimated the whole number of votes given for _Electors of President and Vice-President_, at the general election held in the said State, on the seventh day of November, in the year 1876, according to the certified statements received by the Secretary of State in the manner directed by law, do hereby determine, declare, and certify, that

Horatio Seymour, Atherton Hall, De Witt C. West, Henry D. Graves, Parke Godwin, William J. Averell, Thomas H. Rodman, Daniel B. Judson, Edward Rowe, Edmund A. Ward, Thomas D. Jones, Ansel Foster, Oswald Ottendorfer, James McQuade, Thomas Mackellar, Bartholomew Lynch, Anthony Dugro, Calvin L. Hathaway, Augustus Schell, George W. Knowles, Frederick Smyth, William C. Dryer, Joseph J. O'Donohue, Frederick O. Cable, Samuel F. Barger, John McDougall, Jordan L. Mott, Jerome Lee, James H. Holdane, Charles B. Benedict, William Voorhis, Cyrus Clarke, Addison P. Jones, Porter Sheldon, Eli Perry,

were, by the greatest number of votes given at the said election, respectively elected _Electors of President and Vice-President_ of the United States.

"Given under our hands, at the office of the Secretary of State, of said State, in the city of Albany, the twenty-fifth day of November, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and seventy-six.

"JOHN BIGELOW, _Secr'y of State_. "L. ROBINSON, _Comptroller_. "CHARLES N. ROSS, _Treasurer_. "CHARLES S. FAIRCHILD, _Attorney-General_.

"State of New York,} "Office of the Secretary of State.} _ss._:

"I CERTIFY the foregoing to be a true copy of an original certificate of the Board of State Canvassers, on file in this office, and of the whole thereof.

[SEAL]

"Given under my hand and seal of office, at the city of Albany, the twenty-fifth day of November, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and seventy-six.

EDGAR K. APGAR, "_Deputy Secretary of State_."

FRANK CROCKER TO TILDEN

WASHINGTON, D. C., _Jan. 15, '77_.

"HON. S. J. TILDEN.

"SIR,--I have in my possession a telegram sent to Z. Chandler, chrm. Repn. com., by O. C. Babcock, dated Chicago, Dec. 4/76.

"I consider it not only very valuable, but the _key_ to the editorials and political arguments on the 'electoral count' which has filled the columns of the _National Republican_, the administration organ, for the past month.

"Respectfully Yours, "FRANK CROCKER, "617 6th St., N. W."

O. C. BABCOCK TO Z. CHANDLER (TELEGRAM)

"Chicago, _Dec. 4th, 1876_.

"HON. Z. CHANDLER,

"_Chairmn. Repn. Com., Washington_.

"The Illinois electors here have agreed they will vote an open ballot. If any elector refuses so to vote, or refuses to throw a ballot for Hayes and Wheeler as he votes, they will immediately declare a vacancy in the district thus represented by such judge and elect another in his place; they claim that such action is not only perfectly justifiable, but that it cannot be reviewed by any tribunal, as the action of the electors is final. If this meets with your approbation I suggest you to telegraph this programme to every Republican State.

"O. C. BABCOCK."

* * * * *

The subscriber of the last preceding letter during the Civil War was on the staff of General Grant, and when the latter became President acted as his private secretary. He was indicted in 1876 by the Grand Jury of St. Louis for frauds upon the revenue and for the "safe-burglary conspiracy" referred to in the following testimony of one of the witnesses in the trial, Col. H. C. Whitley, who was one of the parties charged, but desired, before doing so, to place on the record a conditional pardon granted him.

"'Harrington took a letter from his pocket and asked me if the signature was that of A. B. Cornell, and I said it was not. He said that some of Pinkerton's detectives were here, and I should send some of my men to work in with the memorialists and find out what they were doing. I sent men out. Harrington gave me some names on a paper whom he wished to be worked in with. I don't remember the names. I told Harrington that I would send men over, naming Mr. Nettleship. I went to New York on the same night (15th) and sent Mr. Nettleship over, giving him the names, and telling him that they were the parties to be worked. I don't remember that I gave Nettleship any instructions to report to Harrington at this particular time. I was again in this city on the 29th of March, having previously sent over a man named Oberworth with Nettleship. I found on my arrival that Oberworth had been arrested for peddling cigars without a license, and I told Harrington that he (Oberworth) was one of my men, and he was released. Mr. Harrington complained that the men were good for nothing, and he wanted men who would push matters along and work to some purpose. Harrington said something must be done; that he had a plan which would throw dirt and ridicule on the memorialists. He said they thought that Evan's books were in his office, and they were trying to get them, and he thought that to have his office robbed was the best plan; he said he did not care if his safe was knocked or blown to hell, as the damned safe belonged to him. I said I did not wish the men to get into trouble, and Harrington replied that there was no danger, as he was district attorney, and they should not be hurt. I came from New York on the 29th, and returned the same night. I came again on the 8th of April, and saw Gen. Babcock at his office. I asked how matters were about the investigation, and he said all right, that Harrington kept him posted up.

"'I was again in Washington on the 27th, arriving in the afternoon, four days after the safe was blown up. I went up to Harrington's house, and he told me about what had transpired during the blowing of the safe. He said that everything would have worked all right except for the interference of Major Richard, the superintendent of police, who would not co-operate with him. After that I called upon Gen. Babcock at his office in the White House. He spoke about the safe burglary, saying that it was very badly managed; that he thought I was smarter than to allow things to go on as they did. The next time I saw Babcock was in New York, in the May following. I went up to the Fifth Avenue Hotel in that city. After talking to him a while I said that I expected that there would be some more trouble about the case. Babcock said: "No; stand by your guns; I'll protect your rear." I spoke to him about Bluford Wilson, then the Solicitor of the Treasury, investigating my office in New York for the purpose of ascertaining whether any of the secret-service men were connected with the safe burglary, and then told him I would do it, that is, stand by my guns if he protected the rear.

"'Soon afterward I had an interview with Harrington at the Metropolitan Hotel, New York. I complained to him that the whole matter of the safe burglary seemed to be falling upon the secret service, and that we would likely get into trouble about it. Harrington said: "No; I am the real district attorney at Washington, and I will protect all of you." I told him that Somerville wanted some money, and Harrington gave me $500 for him. I paid it all to Somerville as part of his fee. Harrington did not say what particular service Somerville rendered. During the same month I had an interview with Babcock here. I called to see him at his house. Harrington then lived a few doors from him on the same row. I told Babcock I wanted to see Harrington, and Babcock sent after him. Harrington came in by the alley gate to Babcock's yard. I told Harrington that Somerville wanted more money, but do not remember that Babcock heard me speak to Harrington, or that he knew the money was to go to Somerville. All I remember is that Harrington brought me the money, and that I gave it to Somerville, who said he wanted to use it to get Benton, the burglar who was arrested on the night of the burglary, out.'

"In speaking of other interviews with Babcock, Whitley testified as follows:

"'In the autumn of 1875 I called at Babcock's cottage at Long Branch and had a talk with him. I told him that Albert Cunz and Delome, two former secret-service men, had been thrown out of employment in consequence of the safe burglary and their connection with it. Babcock said he would try and get them in the New York Custom-House. I told him that I would like for myself a commission to go somewhere, and Babcock said he would see the Secretary of the Treasury, and have me sent to Europe with some bonds. I told him I did not want to go to Europe, but wanted to go to Colorado. Babcock said: "If any trouble comes up you can 'slide off,'" or words to that effect. I told him I had had trouble enough in connection with the case, and did not want any more.

"'I had a conversation with Harrington after we were indicted in the fall of 1874 in the Metropolitan Hotel. I told him I did not like the idea of being indicted in the matter. He told me it would be all right, that he would pay counsel for me. He directed me to write and employ Gen. S. S. Henkin, of Washington, as my attorney, which I did. That case resulted in a hung jury. This spring, previous to going before Proctor Knott's committee, I called at the White House to see Gen. Babcock, and requested him to do all he could to have Mr. Rice, who was with me, appointed postmaster at Pueblo, Colorado. He said he would assist all he could. As I was leaving the room, I remarked to him: "Things look like we will have more trouble." He answered: "Yes, things do look squally; but it will all blow over again."'"[17]

[17] New York _Sun_, September 21, 1876.

Babcock was acquitted, with the aid of a deposition by General Grant, and only a few weeks before this trial was promoted to a colonelcy.

Only four months before the indictment and trial of Babcock, Secretary Belknap, a member of President Grant's Cabinet, was impeached and put on trial before the Senate at Washington. During the trial the late George F. Hoar, one of the Republican Senators from Massachusetts, addressed the Senate, and closed his discourse with the following fearful arraignment of the administration during the Presidency of Grant, and gave a transparent exposure of the reasons why the satellites of the President were determined to shrink from no crime necessary to prevent the inauguration at Washington of a President who had become famous by the havoc he had already made of the Tweed Ring plunderers in New York and the Canal Ring plunderers at Albany, and whose advent to Washington would put to flight the horde of miscreants who then infested both ends of the capitol:

"My own public life has been a very brief and insignificant one, extending little beyond the duration of a single term of Senatorial office, but in that brief period I have seen five judges of a high court of the United States driven from office by threats of impeachment for corruption or maladministration. I have heard the taunt from friendliest lips, that when the United States presented herself in the East to take part with the civilized world in generous competition in the arts of life, the only product of her institutions in which she surpassed all others beyond question was her corruption. I have seen in the State in the Union foremost in power and wealth four judges of her courts impeached for corruption, and the political administration of her chief city become a disgrace and a by-word throughout the world. I have seen the chairman of the Committee on Military Affairs in the House, now a distinguished member of this court, rise in his place and demand the expulsion of four of his associates for making sale of their official privilege of selecting the youths to be educated at our great military school. When the greatest railroad of the world, binding together the continent and uniting the two great seas which wash our shores, was finished, I have seen our national triumph and exaltation turned to bitterness and shame by the unanimous reports of three committees of Congress, two of the House, and one here, that every step of that mighty enterprise had been taken in fraud. I have heard in highest places the shameless doctrine avowed by men grown old in public office that the true way by which power should be gained in the republic is to bribe the people with the offices created for their service, and the true end for which it should be used when gained is the promotion of selfish ambition and the gratification of personal revenge. I have heard that suspicion haunts the footsteps of the trusted companions of the President. These things have passed into history. The Hallam, or the Tacitus, or the Sismondi, or the Macaulay who writes the annals of our time will record them with his inexorable pen; and now, when a high Cabinet officer, the constitutional adviser of the Executive, flees from office before charges of corruption, shall the historian add that the Senate treated the demand of the people for its judgment of condemnation as a farce, and laid down its high functions before the sophistries and jeers of the criminal lawyer? Shall he speculate about the petty political calculations as to the effect of one party or the other which induced his judges to connive at the escape of the great public criminal; or, on the other hand, shall he close the chapter by narrating how these things were detected, reformed, and punished by constitutional processes which the wisdom of our fathers devised for us, and the virtue and purity of the people found their vindication in the justice of the Senate?"

CHARLES MASON TO TILDEN

"'ALTO,' NEAR EDGE HILL, "KING GEORGE, VA., _Dec. 5, '76_.

"DEAR SIR,--Although I am confident if any one in the U. S. has the ability to cope with the rogues who are bent on cheating the people out of the hard-earned victory they have achieved, in the Presidential contest, it is yourself; yet, at the risk of being thought highly presumptuous, I venture on a few suggestions I have not observed thrown out by any one.

"That the Constitution does not provide for the extraordinary condition of things in which we are placed by the Congress, nor that any of its annotators furnish an apt construction, is certain; and for the same reason, I suppose, as that given by Bishop Warburton, why no allusion was made in the Pentateuch to a future state. The patriots of the Revolution, like the Patriarchs after the creation, no doubt thought the proposition so self-evident and the provisions so ample for pious and honest men that they did not dream of the world's being peopled by such a race of sinners and corruptionists.