Sketches of Successful New Hampshire Men

by Various

Hon. Wm. E. Chandler, Washington, D. C.

Mr. Chandler did not keep out of politics, but was elected as a delegate-at-large from New Hampshire to the national convention of 1868, and subsequently was chosen secretary of the national committee. He held this position during President Grant's administrations, and devoted himself to the successful conduct of the campaigns of 1868 and 1872. In 1876 he declined to occupy the position longer, but still contributed much of his time to assist in the conduct of the canvass. He had, during this time, become the owner of the largest interest in the New Hampshire Statesman and the Monitor, the leading weekly and daily Republican papers in the state, at Concord, and he was elected, in November, a member from Concord to the constitutional convention which amended the constitution of the state.

After voting in Concord at the presidential election in 1876, Mr. Chandler left for Washington, reaching the Fifth-Avenue Hotel, New York, in the early hours of the morning. The other managers of the national campaign had retired for the night, believing they were defeated; but, coincident with Mr. Chandler's arrival, news reached the committee-rooms that Oregon had been carried by the Republicans, which would elect Hayes and Wheeler by one vote. Mr. Chandler at once comprehended the situation and the points of danger, and, without waiting for consultation, sent dispatches warning against defeat by fraud, to Oregon, Florida, South Carolina, and Louisiana. At the urgent solicitation of prominent members of the party, he was prevailed upon to start immediately for Florida, to protect the interests of the Republican party. He there became counsel for the Hayes electors before the canvassing board of the state, and it is universally admitted, by Republicans and Democrats alike, that to him more than to any other man is due the preservation to the Republicans of the fruits of their victory in that state. When the contest was transferred from the states to congress, and, finally, before the electoral commission chosen to arbitrate and decide who had been elected president, Mr. Chandler acted as counsel, and assisted in preparing the case as presented to the commission.

In the report of the special committee sent by the senate to investigate the election in Florida, made January 29, 1877, by Senator Sargent, of California, is contained a full statement of what the committee considered to be the law with reference to the conclusiveness of the declaration by a state canvassing board of the vote of the state for presidential electors, which was the earliest formal exposition of the principles of law which were finally adopted by the commission. The authorship of this statement is freely attributed by Mr. Sargent to Mr. Chandler, and the points, briefly stated, are as follows:—

I. The canvassing board was created by competent legislative authority, with jurisdiction to ascertain, declare, and certify, in due form, the result of the election, and in this case it did certify that the Hayes electors had been chosen by nine hundred and thirty majority.

This declaration, having been made by a tribunal having unquestioned jurisdiction over the subject-matter, is conclusive, and it has not been and cannot be reviewed, revised, or reversed, by any power anywhere existing.

II. It cannot be reversed by any authority proceeding from the state Of Florida. It cannot be reversed by a recanvass of the votes.

III. As the decision of the canvassing board, that the Hayes electors were chosen, cannot be reversed by a recanvass, neither can the title of the electors be impaired upon proceedings of quo warranto.

IV. If the declaration of the result of the election of presidential electors in Florida, made by the state tribunal authorized by the legislature to make such declaration, cannot be reversed by any authority proceeding from the state of Florida, neither can it be reversed by congress. The constitutional provision, section 1, article 2, is, "That each state shall appoint, in such manner as the legislature thereof shall direct, a number of electors equal," etc. It is not pretended by anyone that the president of the senate, or congress, in counting the electoral vote, can do more than merely ascertain whether or not the electors have been appointed within each state in the manner prescribed by the legislature thereof; and in the present case, if congress shall find that the result of the late election was ascertained and declared by the proper tribunal, created for that purpose and authorized by the legislature to make the declaration, that declaration and decision by such tribunal having jurisdiction over the subject-matter is final and conclusive upon congress, and cannot be reviewed, revised, or reversed. It does appear that the canvassing board of the state of Florida, duly authorized by the legislature, canvassed the result of the election, and declared and certified that the Hayes electors were chosen, which result appearing to the governor of the state, he issued certificates to the electors so declared chosen, and they proceeded to perform their functions. Beyond this authorized decision and declaration of the proper state tribunal, it is respectfully submitted that neither the president of the senate nor congress can go.

V. In stating this doctrine, that neither the president of the senate nor congress has the right, in counting the electoral vote from any state, to go beyond the decision of that tribunal authorized by the state legislature to ascertain and declare the result of the vote of the people of the state for electors, it is not meant to assert that the president of the senate, or congress, cannot go behind the mere ministerial certificate of the governor. It is the duty of the executive to give a certificate to the electors chosen in the manner the legislature may have appointed, and declared to be so chosen by the tribunal authorized by the legislature to make such declaration. But if the governor is, by the state statute, not a member of such tribunal, his certificate is as purely ministerial as that of the clerk of a court certifying a copy of a judgment. It is a valid certificate if it is in accordance with the facts appearing upon the record. It is utterly invalid and worthless if contrary to those facts. Therefore the president of the senate, or congress, in canvassing the electoral votes, even ministerially, and with no authority to go beyond the declaration of the election made by the state tribunal authorized to decide the result of the election, may look beyond the mere ministerial certificate of the executive, who has been authorized to decide nothing, and whose certificate is of no value or binding force unless correctly and truthfully issued in accordance with the legally declared election. This distinction, which enables the president of the senate, or congress, to go behind the mere ministerial certificate of the governor of the state, but yet prohibits them from going behind the declaration as to the result of the election duly made by the proper state tribunal authorized to make such declaration, although technical, is as clear and distinct, and founded upon principles of law as sound and wise, as those which allow any tribunal to go behind a clerk's merely ministerial certificate purporting to verify the result of a verdict or judgment in court, without allowing it to go beyond the true record of the verdict or judgment itself.