Hoar, 'Wieeler, and Frye simply expressed "emphatic
disapprobation of its proceedings" and "dissent from
the view it took of its own powers and duties," and pro-
nounced its conduct "ill^al" in "attempting to cure
one wrong by another." ^

The law required that the board should meet within
ten days after the date of the election. On Friday,
the 17th of November, the members assembled and
held a secret conference. On the next day they met
again and adopted a resolution to the effect that an
invitation should be extended to each delegation of
"distinguished gentlemen from other states" to send
five members to witness the proceedings. The invi-
tation was accepted, and the visiting statesmen took
turns in attending the meetings of the board. ^

At the first public session on the following day the
board announced the rules which were to govern
their proceedings. The rules provided that the board
should "first take up, canvass, and compile" the re-
turns from those parishes to which no objections had
been made, and should then proceed to consider the
returns from the disputed parishes; that all protests
and arguments from candidates or their attorneys
should be made in writing; that, except by members

in, R. Mis. Doc, No. 261, 48d Conf. 2d Sess.. p. 28.
2 8. B^ Doc. No. 2, 44Ui Cong. 2d Sess., pp. 86-36.
