THE HAYES-TILDEN PRESIDENTIAL CONTEST

By Edward Stanwood.

THE election of Hayes, Ohio Republican, over Samuel J. Tilden, New York Democrat, in n the Presidential campaign of 1876, was the most closely contested in the political history of the country. The electoral vote, as decided by a commission consisting of five Senators, five Representatives and five Supreme Court Justices, was 185 for Hayes and 184 for Tilden. This account of the long and bitter contest is from Stanwood's "History of Presidential Elections," published by Houghton Mifflin Company.

Hayes had a brilliant Civil War record, being brevetted major-general, but was unfortunate in running counter to the political leaders of his party during his Presidency. He stalwartly supported measures for the public welfare that were nullified by Congress, and opposed measures that were passed over his veto. His liberality in dealing with the South sowed the seeds of a prosperity such as it had not enjoyed since the War.

THE nomination of Rutherford B. Hayes was made unanimous on the seventh ballot. He was the only candidate who had made a gain on every vote ; and as he was, if not very well known, entirely unobjectionable to the friends of all other candidates, it was less difficult to concentrate votes upon him than upon any other person in the list. Blaine, who was informed by telegraph at his house in Washington of the progress of the voting, wrote a dispatch congratulating Hayes immediately on receiving the result of the fifth vote.

The Democrats met at St. Louis two weeks later.

The Convention was deprived of much of its interest by the fact that Tilden's lead for the nomination was so very great. He was known to have more than four hundred delegates out of the whole convention of 744, and while his candidacy was opposed, the opposition came from States which nevertheless chose unanimous delegations in his favor. The delegates chosen in the interest of other candidates were for the latter, but not against Tilden. His nomination was therefore universally expected, except by the more sanguine friends of other candidates.

The polls had hardly closed on the day of election, the 7th of November, when the Democrats began to claim the Presidency. The returns came in so unfavorably for the Republicans that there was hardly a newspaper organ of the party which did not, on the following morning, concede the election of Tilden. He was believed to have carried every Southern State, as well as New York, Indiana, New Jersey and Connecticut. The whole number of electoral votes was 369. If the above estimate was correct, the Democratic candidates would have 203 votes, and the Republican candidates 166 votes. But word was sent out on the same day from Republican headquarters at Washington that Hayes and Wheeler were elected by one majority; that the States of South Carolina, Florida, and Louisiana had chosen Republican electors.

Then began the most extraordinary contest that ever took place in the country. The only hope of the Republicans was in the perfect defense of their position. The loss of a single vote would be fatal.

An adequate history of the four months between the popular election and the inauguration of Hayes would fill volumes. Space can be given here for only a bare reference to some of the most important events. Neither party was overscrupulous, and no doubt the acts of some members of each party were grossly illegal and corrupt. Certain transactions preceding the meetings of electors were not known until long afterward, when the key to the famous "cipher dispatches" was accidentally revealed.

,In four States, South Carolina, Florida, Louisiana and Oregon, there were double returns. In South Carolina there were loud complaints that detachments of the army, stationed near the polls, had prevented a fair and free election. Although the Board of State Canvassers certified to the choice of the Hayes electors, who were chosen on the face of the returns, the Democratic candidates for electors met on the day fixed for the meeting of electors and cast ballots for Tilden and Hendricks. In Florida there were allegations of fraud on both sides. The canvassing board and the governor certified to the election of the Hayes electors, but, fortified by a court decision in their favor, the Democratic electors also met and voted. In Louisiana there was anarchy. There were two governors, two returning boards, two sets of returns showing different results, and two electoral colleges. In Oregon the Democratic governor adjudged one of the Republican electors ineligible, and gave a certificate to the highest candidate on the Democratic list. The Republican electors, having no certificate from the governor, met and voted for Hayes and Wheeler. The Democratic elector, whose appointment was certified by the governor, appointed two others to fill the vacancies, when the two Republican electors would not meet with him, and the three voted for Tilden and Hendricks. All of these cases were very complicated in their incidents, and a brief account which should convey an intelligible idea of what occurred is impossible.

As soon as the electoral votes were cast it became a question of the very first importance how they were to be counted. It was evident that the Senate would refuse to be governed by the twenty-second joint rule in fact, the Senate voted to rescind the rule and it was further evident that if the count were to take place in accordance with that rule it would result in throwing out electoral votes on both sides on the most frivolous pretexts. It was asserted by the Republicans that, under the Constitution, the President of the Senate alone had the right to count, in spite of the fact that the joint rule, the work of their party, had assumed the power for the two Houses of Congress. On the other hand, the Democrats, who had always denounced that rule as unconstitutional, now maintained that the right to count was conferred upon Congress. A compromise became necessary, and the moderate men on both sides determined to effect the establishment of a tribunal, as evenly divided politically as might be, which should decide all disputed questions so far as the Constitution gave authority to Congress to decide them. The outcome of their efforts was the Electoral Commission law of 1877, which was passed as originally reported.