aught us such a
contempt for votes, that one fraudulent certificate is better than ten
thousand of them?"

THE POLITICAL QUESTION.

The advice of the Commission, with the consequent action of Congress,
was a virtual affirmation of this proposition, that if on the morning of
the 6th of December the Federal general commanding in Louisiana had
surrounded the State-House with soldiers, and marching in eight of his
captains, had compelled the Returning Board to certify their
appointment as electors, and the Governor to add his certificate,
Congress and the country would have been obliged to accept the votes of
these captains as the constitutional and lawful votes of Louisiana
electors. Whoever supposes that the union of these States can endure
under such an interpretation of their fundamental law, must be endowed
with credulity beyond the simplicity of childhood. The doctrine is an
open invitation to transgression and usurpation. The judicious
disposition of a few troops in the capitals of disputed States, on the
day of the electoral vote, will perpetuate an Administration just so
long as the audacity of a President, or the cupidity of his
office-holders, may find it desirable; unless, indeed, it be found, as
is most likely, that the ways of fraud are cheaper, easier, and less
palpable than the ways of force.

THE LEGAL QUESTION.

_As to the conclusiveness of the Governor's and canvassers'
certificates._ The doctrine of the majority of the Commission, and of
the Senate, is, that the certificate of the Governor "_on and according
to the determination and declaration_" of the State canvassers, cannot
be shown to be false, though it may have been obtained by force or
fraud. This doctrine admits that the truth of the _Governor's_
certificate can be inquired into, else why the qualification that it
must be "_on and according to_" the canvasser's certificate. It is said
to be good only when in such accord; therefore, when not in accord, it
is good for nothing. We may, then, dismiss the Governor's certificate as
of no account, and to be left therefore out of further discussion. The
substance of the doctrine is, that the _certificate of the State
canvassers_ cannot be contradicted.

This language must, of course, be understood, as used in reference to
the question at that time depending; that is to say, whether evidence to
contradict or annul the certificate was then and there admissible. It
had already been decided in th