Letters and Literary Memorials of Samuel J. Tilden, v. 2

by Samuel J. Tilden

"Hon. Saml. J. Tilden.

"Sir,—Although a citizen in private life, I, nevertheless, feel, I trust, as profound interest as any one in the welfare of our common country. In its life it has had crises, but none more alarming since '60 than that which grows out of the Presidential election between you and Gen. Hayes.

"Of your election I do not entertain a doubt; and it were simply to render our beautiful system of self-government on the part of the people a burlesque and reproach to allow a set of gambling politicians to set at defiance the expressed will of the sovereign people.

"Of course we of the South are powerless in the premises, and were it otherwise I am not prepared altogether to suggest the proper course. At this critical juncture peace is more than ever a social and political necessity. But, then, how can we ever expect to preserve constitutional liberty if such a precedent—so violative and destructive of the distinctive and peculiar feature of our more peculiar system of govt., submission to the legally expressed will of the majority—is tolerated.

"To you, sir, I look for counsel, and I trust you will be endowed with more than your recognized distinguished sagacity.

"I have been very much surprised, and not a little amused, at the contradictory opinions which even the learned in the law and governmental science have given both as to the law and practice in the case of the counting of the electoral votes, and as to the ultimate tribunal known to the Constitution as the final arbiter in the premises. Cushing, the learned parliamentarian, and no mean statesman, has gone so far as to intimate Gen. Grant could, under certain circumstances which may exist, hold over after the 4th of March next and continuously—till, indeed, the succession transpires; and so teaches Senator Bogy in a speech in St. Louis.

"A fearful and most dangerous suggestion, verily! And amazing that it should ever have found lodgment and utterance from so distinguished a source. But it has not the semblance of law or the slightest approach to truth in it.

"Cushing reasons from analogy, and says because officers in many of the States hold over till their successors are installed he therefore sees no reason why Gen. Grant should not do so.

"The ready answer to this opinion, however, is very plain and fatal to the force implied in it. In the case of the State officer, he acts in the instance mentioned by express authority of law. But in the case of the President, he is elected for a term of four years, no more or less, and there being no enabling act authorizing him to protract the term a moment beyond the limitation mentioned, should he do so he would be a usurper and deserve death as such at the hands of any citizen. In the cases you at once see there is no analogy whatever, and hence Cushing is certainly mistaken. As to the force and aspect of the 22d rule or any other rule or rules, about which a volume has been written, in solving adverse views, a word or two disposes of them. They are these modes of procedure—centures of the private action of both Houses of Congress, adopted for their convenience and the harmonious despatch of business. But they are dead letters if they contravene the Constitution of the U. S. or attempt to execute any of its requirements.

"Laws are required for the purpose, and not rules. Laws to which all the departments of legislation are necessarily, by law, parties—Congress and the Executive.