House is to enter upon, as it would in the election of a Speaker, or in the seating of a member, the practical question affecting the election of a President, thereby intending to subvert accepted results, then there may be some claim that it is a question of privilege. But as an expression of opinion, as, for instance, if I should rise and offer a resolution that the gentleman from New York or his title to his seat here was affected by rumors, and as an expression of opinion it was desirable to settle history on that, the Chair would undoubtedly at once rule it was not a question of privilege, because no action was intended. I put it squarely to the Speaker, and upon that, as I have said, shall await with solicitude his ruling, whether under the provisions of the rule, this is a resolution calling for action on the election of President, which action must be in the direction of attacking the legality of the title of the President of the United States to the subversion, it may be, of that title and the expulsion of the incumbent. All that is involved if this question belongs here." "Leave off your damnable faces and begin ” -Garfield's statement of the point. Mr. Garfield said: "The right of petition was discussed on the presentation of the Maryland resolutions. Everybody admitted the unquestioned right of petition; but the right of action here on this floor is a different thing. The question which rises to the dignity of a privileged question depends upon the right of action which some one can demand of the House. A member here can demand action in regard to his right to his seat. "Anything that leads to an action relating to these high questions of privilege, of course, can be called a privileged question. But this memorial, received here by the courtesy of the rules of the House, and not as a matter of right, except as a petition, cannot now, by any form of logic, be raised to the dignity of a question of privilege. Now, I say another thing. This would be a question of privilege without any doubt, provided the resolution alleges a purpose to institute proceedings in impeachment. If he says this is a proceeding intended to pave the way for an impeachment, doubtless it may be made a question of privilege. "If he says that it is a proposition by this House to raise and determine the question of the title of the present Chief Magistrate to the office which he holds, then I answer him that that question has been determined by the joint action of the two Houses of Congress, and is as much beyond the reach of this House as the election of Grant or Washington. "Again, if the object of this resolution is merely to organize a committee for campaign purposes, to make campaign literature for the coming Fall, I affirm that the exigencies of a political party have never yet been treated as a question of privilege. "Furthermore, there is in this resolution-and I reserve the point of order after the point now raised shall have been settled-a proposition that the committee shall have the right to report at any time, and that they shall have the right to sit in recess. Neither of these things can be effected by a majority vote if it comes to that, and I reserve on them the points of order when the time shall have arrived. I conclude by saying I am glad that at last, after this proceeding has so long been hanging over the country, we now know what they are seeking to do. For some weeks I have been inclined to say to these gentleinen, in the language of Hamlet to the players "Leave off your daninable faces and begin.'” The stand which one independent Democrat took—He protests against the threatened "usurpation” of power by the House in the interests of the revolutionists. Mr. Mills, of Texas, said: "The exercise of the power by the Forty-fifth Congress over the question of the election of President of the United States is a usurpation. We have no power over that question at all. By the Constitution of the United States that power to inquire as to who was elected President of the United States was vested in the Forty-fourth Congress, and when that Congress spoke or failed to speak on that question, when it made a law by which it abdicated The Speaker's decision was as follows: "The issue involved is a new one in the history of our country. An examination of the basis upon which the preamble and resolution are introduced is proper. The Legislature of the State of Maryland passed a joint resolution touching the subject treated of in the preamble and resolution just read, a copy of which has been remitted to this body, received and referred, and is within the knowledge of the members of the House. The following language is used: "That due effect has not been given to the electoral vote cast by this State on the 6th day of December, 1876, by reason of fraudulent returns made from other States and allowed to be counted provisionally by the electoral commission and subject to judicial revison "And further Alleging that the returns from Louisiana and Florida, which were counted for the present occupant of the executive chair, were fraudulent and void.' "Here is the appeal of a State of this Union to the Federal legislative power for the correction of a high grievance said to have been committed in the States of Florida and Louisiana against the rights of the State of Maryland, in having by fraud, in said States of Florida and Louisiana, produced a different result in the election of a President and Vice President from that actually decreed by the people themselves at the polls. "Whether these allegations can be sustained by proof, is not for the Chair to consider. It is enough for him to know that they come from a power which within the limits is recognized as sovereign by the Constitution, and that the issue involved runs to the welfare of the people of all the States. Nor is it within the range of propriety for him to express an opinion as to how far such investigation should go to reach the facts, nor what limits should be set up as to remedies to be provided against a recurrence of such like events. "A higher privilege than the one here involved and broadly and directly presented as to the rightful occupancy of the Chief Executive chair of the Government, and the connection of high Government officials with the frauds alleged, the Chair is unable to conceive. "The Chair finds enumerated among the questions of privilege set down in the Manual the following Election of President.' "The Chair therefore rules that the preamble and resolution embrace questions of privilege of the highest character, and recognizes the right of the gentleman from New York to offer the same.' An Appeal from that decision-Straight partisan vote. Mr. Conger (Republican) appealed from this decision; but a motion by Potter (Democrat) to lay the appeal on the table prevailed, by 128 except 2 Republicans, and all the latter Repubyeas to 108 nays; all the former Democrats, licans, except two Democrats, as follows: YEAS-Messrs. Acklin, Aiken, Atkins, Banning, Beebe, H. P. Bell, Benedict, Bickwell, Blackburn, Bliss, Blount, Boone, Bouck, Bragg, Bridges, Bright, Butler, J. W. Caldwell, W. P. Caldwell, Candler, Chalmers, A. A. Clark, J. B. Clarke, Clymer, Cobb, Collins, Cook, S. S. Cox, Cravens, Crittenden, Culberson, Cutler, J. J. Davis, Dean, Dibrell, Dickey, Durham, Eden, Elam, Ellis, J. H. Evins, Ewing, Felton, E. B. Finley, Forney, Fort, Franklin, Garth, Gause, Gibson, Glover, Gunter, Hardenbergh, H. R. Harris, Harrison, Hartridge, Hartzell, Hatcher, Henkle, Henry, Herbert, A. S. Hewitt, G. W. ་ . | Hewitt, Hooker, House, F. Jones, J. T. Jones, Kenna, Kimmel, Knapp, Ligen, Lockwood, Luttrell, Lynde, Mackey, Manning, Martin, Mayham McKenzie, McMahon, 2 Mitchell, Morgan, Morrison, Muldrow, Muller, T. M. Patterson, Phelps, C. N. Potter, Pridemore, Rea, Reagan, J. R. Reilly, Riddle, W. M. Robbins, Robertson, M. Ross. Sayler, Scales, Schleicher, Skelley, Singleton, Slemons, W. E. Smith, Southard, Sparks, Springer, Steele, Stenger, Swann, Throckmorton, R. W. Townshend, Tucker, Turner, Turney, R. B. Vance, Waddell, Walsh, Whitthorne, Wigginton, A. S. Williams, J. Williams, J. N. Williams, A. S. Willis, B. Wilson, F. Wood, Wright, Yeates, Young-ning, Martin, Mayham, McKenzie, McMahon, Money, 128. a A. A. Clark, J. B. Clark, Clymer, Cobb, Collins, Cook, S. S. NAYS-Messrs. Bacon, J. H. Baker, Banks, Bayne, Pofter gags the House of Representatives for nearly a week-Aleck Stephens yelled down, etc. Mr. Hale asked Potter to yield so that he might offer a general amendment (which will be found under the chapter on "Democratic Frauds") to enlarge the sweep of the resolution, so that alleged frauds of the Democrats at the Presidential election might also be investigated, but Potter declined, called the previous question, and would not even be civil until he suddenly found himself, through the action of his revolutionary party friends, without a quorum, and was obliged to move an adjournment, which was carried. For several days Revolutionary Potter insisted on the "previous question," and would not let a soul be heard on it; refusing even to hear Mills, one of his Democratic friends, and the venerable statesman, Alexander H. Stephens, of Georgia, whom, when he strove to gain a brief hearing, was absolutely yelled and hooted down by the Democratic revolutionists; and for as many days the Republicans refused to vote, as they could not amend the resolution nor be heard in protest against it. But at last, on the 17th May-after five days of Democratic absenteeism-enough Democrats were secured to make a quorum, the iniquity was accomplished, and the Potter-Tilden revolutionists were successful. The resolution was adopted by 146 Democratic yeas to 2 Democratic nays-all the Republicans and 7 Democrats declining to vote-as follows: The iniquitous Record of the Democratic party's dishonor-The vote in full on the Potter investigating resolution. YEAS-Messrs. Acklen, Aiken, Atkins, Banning, Beebe, H. P. Bell, Benedict, Bicknell, Blackburn, Bland, Bliss, Blount, Boone, Bouck, Bragg, Bridges, Bright, Buckner, Cabell, J. W. Caldwell, W. P. Caldwell, Candler, Chalmers, NAYS-Messrs. Mills, Morse-2. H. Davis, Deering, Denison, Dunnell, Dwight, Eames, PART IX. The Casey Young Resolution— The Democratic Caucus reject the proposed Declaration that "it is not intended by this proceeding to disturb the present Chief Magistrate"-Republican Caucus declares the Potter movement “revolutionary,” and decide on resistance-Republican address to the people-The Potter Plot to suborn witnesses, declare Hayes an usurper, and put him out of the White House. On the night of Tuesday, May 14, 1878, a caucus of the Democrats of the House was held, whereat a resolution to add to the Potter resolution the following declaration was defeated: "But it is not intended by this proceeding to disturb the present Chief Magistrate in the occupancy of his office, nor to impair public confidence in the policy he has inaugurated toward the Southern States." Which was overchelmingly defentel. "It was said (see Washington Republican, May 16) that many of those present actually believed the amend ment was right, but were whipped into the party traces by Speaker Randall." The Republican caucus unanimously denounces the Potter resolution as "revolutionary,” and decides to “resist." recognizes the right of the gentleman from New York to offer the same. Upon this the Republicans commenced a struggle against the revolutionary scheme, which, after four days' duration, terminated in the success of the conspirators. The Republicans offered to favor the fullest investigation into all alleged frauds, by whichever party pursued its course shamelessly and relentlessly, and charged to have been committed; but the Democracy stiffed all inquiry into attempts at bribery in Oregon, South Carolina and Louisiana, and murder and vioAt a caucus of Republican members of the lence in several of the States. Neither amendment House, May 15, it was unanimously Resolved, That the resolution now pending in the House is an attempt, in a form unjustifiable and illegal, to reopen the question of the Presidential title, a question solemnly settled by the action of the Fortyfourth Congress, which alone had jurisdiction; and is, therefore, revolutionary and destructive of the good order, business prosperity, and peace of the country. Resolved, That the effort of the Democratic majority to force upon the House, without opportunity for amendment or debate, a measure of such revolutionary character, which has not been recommended or considered by any of its committees, but has been devised by individuals for private or party ends, should be resisted by all the means which are authorized by the rules of the House. Republican address to the voters of the United States-The Potter Plot-The intention to “suborn evidence,” declare Hayes "an usurper,” and drive him from his office. "TO THE VOTERS OF THE UNITED STATES: The Democratic House of Representatives has this day (May 17) by a party vote, adopted a resolution which, under the pretense of an investigation, is to lay the foundation for a revolutionary expulsion of the President from his office. This is the culmination of a plot which has been on foot from the day that Hayes and Wheeler were constitutionally declared elected. It made its first public appearance in the resolution of the last Democratic House, adopted at the close of the session, declaring that Tilden and Hendricks were elected. Tilden and Hendricks subsequently made similar public declarations themselves. nor debate was allowed. The inexorable previous question was applied and enforced. This scheme, if pursued-and it is now fully insugurated—can only have the effect of further paralyzing business of all kinds, preventing the restoration of confidence which seemed promising, casting a gloom over every household, and bringing our nation into reproach before the civilized world. The peace of the country is the first consideration of patriots. This new effort of the Democracy to inaugurate anarchy and Mexicanize the Government by throwing doubts up n the legitimacy of the title of the President is in keeping with the recors of that party, one wing of which rebelled against the Government, while the other wing gave them aid and comfort. "We call, therefore, upon all who opposed the rebellion of 1861, without distinction of party, to rally again to the support of law and stable government, and to overwhelm with defeat the reckless agitators who, to gain political power, would add to the present distresses of the country by shaking the foundations of the Government they failed in a four years' war to de"By unanimous order of the committee. “EUGENE HALE, Chairman. "GEORGE C. GORHAM, Secretary." stroy. PART X. Alexander H. Stephens' Letter "A few timid members have long held back,and some The following letter was sent to Potter from The unites Republicans. "NATIONAL HOTEL, WASHINGTON, D. C., May 15, 1878. and "The Hon. CLARKSON N. POTTER, House of Represen tatives. "It is a matter of history that the resolution just adopted was framed to express this object. Speaker of the House was consulted in advance as to whether he would rule that it was a privileged ques- "MY DEAR SIR: I am still confined to my room in tion. The party managers were anxious to conceal this city. I greatly regret that I cannot go and see their purpose, if possible. In this they were defeated you in person. Let me, then, say to you in this way by the Speaker, who would not rule it a question of that I think it will be a great mistake if our friends in privilege unless it clearly assailed the title of the Pre- the House shall pass your resolution under the president. The resolution being offered, he read a care-vious question, thus cutting off Mr. Hale's or other fully-prepared opinion, deciding it to be a question of amendments looking to enlarged investigation. Do highest privilege, because it involved the question of the not insist on the previous question, I could not vote validity of Hayes' title. These are his very words: for it if I were present, and were not paired as I am; "A higher privilege than the one here involved, and nor could I vote for the resolution under the previous broadly and directly presented as to the rightful oc- question without allowing amendments. It would cupancy of the Chief Executive chair of the Govern- only divide the Democracy and unite the Republicans. ment, and the connection of high Government officials My opinion is that mischief instead of good will come with the frauds alleged, the Chair is unable to con- of the investigation by the passage of your resolution ceive. The Chair finds enumerated among the ques-as it is under the previous question. Please excuse tions of privilege set down in the Manual the follow-this note. I feel it my duty, feeble as I am, to send it ing: Election of President.' The Chair therefore to you. rules that the preamble and resolution embrace questions of privilege of the highest character, and "Very respectfully and truly yours, &c., stephens, of Georgia, asks to be heard only | “If they reject the Hale amendment,” they three minutes—But they “order” him into his seat. May 16, Mr. Stephens, in spite of every atempt of Republicans to insure him a respectul hearing, was yelled down by the Demorats with cries of " order," etc., although he nly asked the poor privilege of three minutes. Following is how it is mildly stated in the Congressional Record: "Mr Stephens, of Georgia. I wish to say a word on his question. [Cries of Order!'] "Mr. Wait. Will not gentlemen on the other side isten to the gentleman from Georgia? "Mr. Stephens, of Georgia, I ask to be heard for three minutes. [Cries of Regular Order !'] will be deceived." "No, no," continued Mr. Stephens, "if they must have investigation, why let us have it; but let it be free, full, and fair. If they carry it on in a one-sided way, they will do as the Democracy did in 1860, when they thought they would throw the contesting Presimajority of the votes, and thereby elect Breckenridge. dential aspirants into the House, where they had a But they only looked to the one side, and they were deceived, as this Tilden-Potter combination will be if they reject the Hale amendment." PART XI. "The Speaker. The gentleman from Georgia asks to Carter Harrison's "Question of be heard for three minutes. Is there objection? "Cries of Regular Order!'] "Mr. Humphrey. There is no objection on this side at all to the gentleman from Georgia being heard. An interview with Mr. Stephens, of Georgia. On the evening of the 15th, a representative of the Washington Republican called on Mr. Stephens at the National Hotel, when the following colloquy ensued: Privilege"-To extend the Investigation to Oregon and South Carolina only--Declaring against the power of this Congress to Annul the Presidential Finding. May 22, 1878-Carter Harrison (Democrat), who stole his seat in the House when his opponent, as it now appears, was entitled to it by a large majority of votes, submitted the following as a question of privilege : "Whereas, A select committee of this House has been He believes in Hale's or any other amend-appointed to inquire into certain frauds alleged to ment enlarging the investigation. "Republican. I wish, now, to ask you, Mr. Stephens, if you think there will soon be a sentiment of the deadlock in the House? "Mr. Stephens. Well, in the first place, I will vote for no investigation that is not fair and honest. I think the Republicans should have every latitude to investigate in the same committee that the Democrats do. "R. What are you in favor of ? "Mr. S. I am in favor of voting down the previous question; in favor of Mr. Hale's amendment, and allowing the Republicans to offer anything they may see fit, if they think there has been any fraud. "R. That is fair." Nothing "one sided" for him-What he proposed to suggest to the House-Peace wanted-No more sectional strife. "Mr. S. Yes, I want no one-sided investigation; and if I can get the floor to-morrow I will move that the House take a vote upon ordering the previous question, and that the House do not order it. Then, if that is voted down, the Potter resolution will be open to amendment. I believe there are a great many Democrats who will unite with the Republicans in a full investigation for the purpose of defeating this one-sided business. Let both sides be heard. Honesty in politics, as well as in morals, is the best policy. Mr. Hayes' title to the Presidency I regard as fixed beyond all question. The people of this country want peace and quiet. They want no more sectional strife. Mr. Hayes has done more, I believe, to produce quiet in the South than Mr. Tilden could have done, and more than anybody expected at the time of his inauguration. I think he has faithfully performed his constitutional duty. Nothing would do more to unsettle business than to attack his title." "Snug, the Joiner.” "R. But don't you think that Mr. Potter contemplates attacking it? "Mr. 8. I don't know. I think Mr. Potter in this matter is something like Snug, the joiner, in Midsummer Night's Dream,' who clothes himself in lion's skin and roars, but confidentially informs his fellow actors that he is not the lion he seems to be-simply Snug, the joiner." I have been committed in Florida and Louisiana in- "Be it Resolved, That said committee be, and hereby is, empowered to inquire into the same, if in its opinion testimony thereon of a substantial character shall be presented to the committee; and "Be it further resolved, That the Senate and House of Representatives of the Forty-fourth Congress having counted the electoral votes for President and Vice President, and it having been thereupon declared that Rutherford B. Hayes had received the highest number of said votes for President of the United States, and William A. Wheeler had received the highest number of said votes for Vice President of the United States, it is not now in the power of Congress, nor is it the purpose of this House through said investigation to annul or to attempt to annul the action of the Forty-fourth Congress in the premises." The Vote-Forty-eight Democrats frank enough to "declare "that the power and purpose is to get Hayes out. On the question whether the House will entertain it as a question of privilege, the yeas were 71, nays 50: YEAS-Messrs. Alkins, Banning, H. P. Bell, Bland, Bliss, Boone, Bouck, Brentano, Cabell, W. P. Caldwell, Cannon, Chalmers, A. A. Clark, R. Clark, Cobb, J. D. Cox, S. S. Cox, Culberson, Cutler, J. J. Davis, Durham, Eden, Elam, Felton, E. B. Finley, Fort, Franklin, Garth, Giddings, Glover, Goode, Hardenburgh, J. T. Harris, Harrison, Hartzell, Hatcher, Henkle, Henry, Hunton, Kelley, Lynde, McMahon, Mitchell, Morrison, G. W. Patterson, T. M. Patterson, C. N. Potter, Pound, Rea, J. B. Reilly, Riddle, W. M. Robbins, Scales, Steele, Stenger, Swann, Throckmorton, R. W. Townshend, Turney, R. B. Vance, Waddell, Walsh, M. D White, Whitthorne, Wigginton, A. S. Williams, B. A. Willis, B. Wilson, F. Wood, Wright, Yeates-71. NAYS-Messrs. Bicknell, Blackburn, Blount, Bragg Bridges, Bright, Buckner, J. W. Caldwell, Candler, Carlisle, Clymer, Cook, Cravens, Crittenden, Davidson, Dibrell, Dickey, J. H. Evins, Forney, Fuller, Gause, Gunter, A. H. Hamilton, H. R. Harris, Hartridge, Herbert, G. A quorum not having voted, Harrison yielded to the pressure of his party friends and withdrew his resolution. The Investigation extended, provided the Democratic Committee believe frauds existed elsewhere. Benjamin Wilson, Democrat, on the same day offered the following specious resolution: "Whereas, a select Committee of this House, has heretofore been appointed to investigate alleged frauds in connection with the electoral vote of the States of Louisiana and Florida; now therefore, "Be it resolved, That such Committee be, and they are hereby, authorized to investigate frauds touching the election aforesaid in any other State, provided they have probable cause to believe that such frauds existed.' adopted, Representative Wilson, aforesaid, of on the same day on which his resolution wa West Virginia, in reply to the following ques tions put to him by one of the Tilden-Posts emissaries, made the succeeding answer, viz "Tilden-Post Emissary. What will be the result of the investigation? Will it end in unseating Hayes? "Benjamin Wilson. That depends upon the nature the developments.''' Meeting of the National Democratic Com. mittee-A very full attendance-The Committee approves the Potter Investigation, and declines to disavow a revolutionary intent. "May 22, the National Democratic Committee met at the Arlington Hotel-present, Representative Forney of Ala.; B. M. Hughes, of Colorado; Senator Barnum, of Conn.; George T. Barnes, of Ga.; William C. Gondy of Ill.; Austin H. Brown, of Ind.; M. M. Home, of Iowa; Isaac E. Eaton, of Kan.; H. D. McHenry, of Ky.; R. F. Jonas, of La.; Edmund Wilson, of Me Outerbridge Horsey, of Md.; Frederick O. Prince, of Mass.; Edward Kanter, of Mich.; William Lochrane. "Sunset" Cox moved to refer the resolution of Minn.; Ethal Barksdale, of Miss.; John G. Priest, to the Potter investigating Committee! And of Mo.; George L. Miller, of Neb.; Robert B. Keating, 89 Democrats voted to so refer, while only 29 Ross, of N. J.; Representative Hewett, of N. Y.; Senof Nev.; R. W. Sulloway, of N. H.; Representative Democrats voted against such reference. Cox's ator Ransom, of N. C.; John G. Thompson, of Ohio; motion was defeated, however, by 89 yeas-James H. Reon, of S. C.; William B. Bale, of Tenn 116 nays-as follows: YEAS-Messrs. Atkins, H. P. Bell, Bicknell, Blackburn, Bliss, Blount, Boone, Bouck, Bragg, Bridges, Bright, J. W. Caldwell, W. P. Caldwell, Candler, Chalmers, Clymer, Cook, S. S. Cox, Cravens, Crittenden, Culberson, Davidson, J. J. Davis, Dibrell, Dickey, Dunham, Eden, Eickhoff, Elam, J. H. Evans, Ewing, E. B. Finley, Forney, Fuller, Garth, Gause, Gibson, Giddings, Gunter, A. H. Hamilton, Hardenbergh, H. R. Harris, Harrison, Hartridge, Hartzell, Henry, Herbert, G. W. Hewitt, F. Jones, J. T. Jones, Kenna, Kimmel, Ligon, Manning, Mayham, McKenzie, Morrison, Muldrow, Muller, T. M. Patterson, Phelps, C. N. Potter, Reagan, J. B. Reilly, Riddle, W. M. Robbins, Robertson, Scales, Schleicher, Shelley, Singleton, W. E. Smith, Sparks, Steele, Swann, Throckmorton, R. W. Townshend, Turner, Turney, R. B. Vance, Waddell, Warner, Whitthorne, Wigginton, A. S. Williams, J. N. Williams, B. A. Willis, F. Wood, Yeates-89. NAYS-Messrs. Aldrich G A. Bagley, J. H. Baker. Ballou Banks, Banning, Bland, Boyd Brentano, Brewer, Briggs T. M. Browne, Buckner H C Burchard. Butler, Cabell, Camp, J M. Campbell, Cannon, Carlisle, Caswell, Claflin, J.B. Clark, Jr, R Clark, Cobb, Cole, Conger, J. D. Cox, Cutler, Denrison, Dunnell, Eames, Ellsworth, Errett, Felton, Fort, Foster, Franklin, Freeman, Gardner, Garfield, Glover, Goode, Hale, Harmer. J. T. Harris, Haskell Hatcher, Hendee, Henderson, Hubbell, Hungerford. Hunter. Hunton, Ittner, James, J. S. Jones, Jorgensen. Joyce. Keifer, Keightley, Kelley, J. H. Ketcham Killinger, Knapp, Lapham, Lathrop Lindsey. Lynde, Marsh, McCook, McKinley, McMahon, Mills, Mitchell, Monroe, Morse, H. S. Neil, Norcross, O'Neill, Page, G. W. Patterson W. A. Phillips, Pollard, Poud, Powers, Price, Pridemore, Rainey, Randolph; Rea, Red, A. V. Rice, Ryan, Sampson, Sexton. Shellenberger, Sinnickson, Smalls, Southard, Springer, Stenger. Stewart, J. W. Stone, Thornburgh Tipton, A Townsend, Van Vorhes, Wait Walsh, H White, MD White, A. Williams, R. Williama, B. Wilson, Wright-116. The resolution was then adopted without a division. What the mover of that resolution declared B. B. Smalley, of Vt.; Robert A. Coghill, of Va.; and Alexander Campbell, of W. V. There were only eight or nine absentees.” The following is from the New York Tribune: "WASHINGTON, May 23.-Action has been taken by the National Democratic Committee on the subject of the Potter investigation, which is most significant. At a meeting held this evening, almost the only subject of discussion was whether the committee should declare that it is not the purpose of the Democrats to attack the title of President Hayes. The committee decline to declare that no attack is intended. There was no division of opinion, however, on a resolution approving the investigation in itself, which was adopted, as follows: "Resolved, That the action of the House of Representatives in appointing a committee fully empowered to investigate and report upon the frauds alleged to have been committed in the late Presidential election, to the end that the truth may be made known to the people, and the repetition of such frauds be prevented in the future, meets the approval of this committee." Admissions of an influential member of the National Democratic Committee that "the Democratic party may desire to make a most effective attack on the title of the President." "One of the most influential members of the Democratic National Committee remarked to-day that the committee could not afford to declare in advance of the investigation itself what course the party should pursue. Nobody knows what the committee may discover, and it may be, this gentleman said, that the Democratic party may desire to make a most effective attack on the title of the President. He would not say that he thought this probable, but it certainly was possible. "The Democratic National Committee, therefore, like Democrats in Congress, has been very careful to have a door for revolutionary proceedings open in spite of all the individual members of the party may have to say. If the investigation fails, they will assert that they never intended to attack the title of President Hayes. If it should succeed in making Democratic partisans believe that there was fraud, the question whether revolutionary proceedings shall be instituted or not will be seriously considered." |