This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1885 edition. Excerpt: ...has been clothed by the forms of law with actual incumbency and possession of the office." The arguments ended, the commissioners debated for a day or two by themselves, and then voted, --to admit testimony as to the elector's eligibility, --by eight to seven, Bradley voting with the Democrats; to exclude testimony as to whether the board acted illegally, --by eight Republican votes to seven Democratic. The question of the one elector's eligibility was then considered and the substantially unanimous conclusion was in favor of the elector. The decision was reported to the two Houses, --Florida's three votes awarded to Hayes. The Senate by a party vote sustained the decision, --the House objected to it, voting on a party line except for one stray independent Democrat. So the commissioners' decision stood unreversed. The final result was now clearly foreshadowed. "When the case of Louisiana went to the commission, motions were made by Democratic commissioners, --first, that evidence be admitted that the returning-board was an unconstitutional body and its acts void, --rejected by a party vote, eight to seven; next, that evidence be admitted that the board was illegally constituted, in that its members were all of one party, --No, eight to seven; then, that evidence be admitted that the board threw out votes dishonestly and fraudulently, --No, eight to seven. The governor's seal ends it, said the eight; count Louisiana's vote for Hayes. The commissioners' verdict went before Congress. The final word rested now with Senate and House. Senators debated from the lawyers' stand-point. Thurman urged: Such an omnipotent returning-board as is here recognized is hostile to the principles of our government. This board did not even fulfill the requirement of the law...