fc-ora-i- - - THE BEDFORD GAZETTE ~ j M PUBLISSEfc EVER* FRIDAY MORMN'J ' BY B. F. BEYERS .. the following terms, to wit: 82 00 p-r annum, if pant strictly in advance. ,2.5 .f paid within 6 months; $3.00 if not paid aithiu 6 months. subscription taken tor less than six months j rrF-No prper discontinued until all arrearages are j paid, unless at the option of the publisher. It has , been decided by the United States Courts that t.uv Jiopp.se of a newspaper without the paymen or arrearages, is prima facie evidence ot fraud and is a criminal otience. [TF-The courts have decided that persons are ac countable for the subscription price of newspaper, if they take them from the post oihee, whether they subscribe for them, or not. _______ THH GREAT FRAUD Upon the Voters of Bedford, Fulton an i Som erset Counties Debate at tbe Organization of the House. ; The Clerk. (Ah.) I have before me the re turns from the counties of Somerset, Bedford and Fulton. There are two papers which I will read: . * "We, the undersigned return judges ol Uic counties cf Somerset, Bedford and the State of Pennsylvania, said counties coin poring, under the act of Assembly entitled 'An act to fix the number of Senators and 'Repre sentatives, and to form ttie State into districts,' lie., approved the sth day ot May. A. L>• 2 BJ4, a Representative district, and entitled, under said act, to elect two uiembir# ot the House of Representatives of the said Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, having met at the Court House, | in the borough of Bedford, in the sai l county ol j Bedford, and having cast up the several county j returns of the said counties of Somerset, Bed- j ford and Fulton, do certify: That, at the gene- j rat election held on the second 1 uesJay, 11th , day of October, A. t>. Ido l, the following nam ed persons had respectively, including the sol diers' vote, the number of votes hereinatter set forth, for members of the House of Represen tatives of said Commonwealth of Pennsylva nia, viz: "David B. Armstrong had five thousand and nine votes (5,009.) "Moses A. Ross had live thousand votes j (5,000.) "Hiram Findlay had four thousand nine hun dred and six votes (4,906 ) "Benjamin F- Meyers had four thousand eight hundred and seventy-three votes (4,8.5 ) j "And that Most# A. Ross arid David B. Arm strong, having a majority ot the votes cast in said counties, including the soldiers' vote, are duly elected members of the Hou#e of Repre sentatives of the said Common Wealth of Penn sylvania. "In witness whereof wt have hereunto set our hands and seals, this Jt'Vi lay, the fourth day of November, AD. 1864, i.e. tig the Friday following the third Friday uf:e: mid general election. "M. D. Miller, of Somerset cou ity. [L. s.] [L. s.J (L. S j "Attest:—S. L. RUSSELL. "James Lynch, the return judge of p t dtoir county, and Joseph W. Eider, the return ju\" e of BeuiVrel county, refuse to sign the above, he cm ;f# they ail *?e, the certificate of the sol- I dk m~ vo? in Bedford county, produced by sari Eider, was not signed by all the return judges : of said county who were present :tl the meet ing on the 28th of October M. D. MILLER." ; The second paper is as follows: "To the Hon.. Eu Sifer, See;etury of the Com- I teomvt'Utk: "The undersigned return judges of the Rep- ! rerontative district composed of the counties of | Somer.-et, Redtbi J and Fulton, appointed at a j meeting of the return judges of their respective counties, held on Friday, October 2 8th, A. L>. ' 18:14, for the purpose >f casting up their sev- ; era! county returns for tiie office of Represi n- ; t tative in (he State Legislature for the district j composed as aforesaid, hereby certify that they ! met in the borough of"Bedford, on Friday,; November 4th, A. D. 1564, and, pursuant to the act of Assembly in such case made, and pro vided, did cast up the returns of the vot. s cast in their respective counties at the .lection held on the second Tuesday of October, (being the 1 ltb day,) A. L>. 1864, for the offices aforesaid, and that •"B. F. Meyers received forty-seven hundred and nin tv-five votes (4,795.) "Hiram Find lay received forty-eight hundred and five votes (4,805.) <- Da\id B. Armstrong received forty-seven hundred and twenty-four votes (4,724.) "Moses A. l<>ss received forty-seven hundred and fifty-four votes (4,75 4 ) "And that B . F. Movers and Hiram Findlay, having receive. 1 respectively tiie highest num ber ot votes cs t in said district for said offices, are duly elected R-presentatives in the Legisla ture of Pcr.nsylv ania, for tiie y ear one thousand eight bund red a nd sixty-five. "Witness outc hands and seals, this 4th day of November, A - I> 1864- "JO,SEPH W. ELDER, [L. S.] Return Judge for Bedford eountv. "JAMES LYNCH, [i- s] JRaLuti i Judge tor Fulton county. [L. S.j Return Judge for Somerset county. "Attest: —Joit> G. FISHER, Clerk " The only adju< limited case,that I know ot where the like siat e of affairs has ever been presented for a de 'ision, vvas when the Court of Quarter Sessions (I think) of l'hiladelpbia, had before it the case of Sheriff Ewings' secu rities. The court in that ca-e held that return judges had no rtgh t to nmke two returns —that the two papers were but one return, and that it was the duty of the party to whom such re turns were presented for adjudication to com pare thcin ligitlwr and make but one ot them. The Clerk of this House stands somewhat in the position of the Master of Rolls in Parlia ment. It is his duty t> mako a roil < i tics House; a.;d while Ido not surrender vvl. it 1 believe to be ray duty in this case. 1 hav the right, which I purpose to exercise here, of asking the instruction ot tbe House as to vvli'n ii cf the names up n these two papers shall be put uoon the rolls of the House- Mr BROWN. (Ab.) Mr. Clerk, Ido not exuc;;y like the port ion in whi. h the clerk pro (i.t i pat this case. It occurs to nie that tree submission. of the quest!.n to the House, is wrong in theory and wrong in principle, and tb :t it vviii inevitably be wrot-g wt pernicious in practice. As suggested by flie clerk himself, tha clerk ft tbe House stands iu the position of - -Lj " - lL . ...... ... .. ... . ! . ||,H M. ... .. ~_J JL. r VOLUME GO. NEW SERIES. Master of Rolls. It is his duty to attend to the preliminary organization of the House —to act lo some extent in the capacity of Speaker of the Hou##, alter twelve o'clock to-day, when the gavel of tiie clerk fell, and the term of the former Speaker expired. Now, an extreme case will illustrate a prin ciple. Suppose that instead of two me in tiers, a majority of the members of this House stood here in the same position as the gentlemen from Somerset, Radford and Fulton, would it be said that the clerk should take the direction of tiro balance of the House—less than a quorum — as to what lie should do? Government can nev er die' Like the king it is perpetual; audit must be perpetual in all its departments. It must be perpetual in this department. There must be a governing power somewhere to de termine who are the members before there Can be a formal organization of the House. Now, sir, entertaining these views, and of course without any intention to reflect upon the clerk of the House, (because this is a new ques tion,) I oiler the following resolution: litaolrtil, That the chief clerk be directed to discharge his duty by entering upon the roll'of the House of Representatives the names ol the two gentlemen from the legislative district;com posed of the counties of Somerset, Bedford and Fulton, who, according to the papers in his hands, appear to have the highest number of votes. That is the principle of free suffrage. Mr. PERSHING. (Dem.) Mr. Clerk, it ( seems to nie that it precedents are worth any ! thing at all in this body tliis question is clear of difficulty. Ido out agree with the geutle ; man lrom Warren (Mr. Brown) as to the pow- I era vested in tiie clerk of the last House. If it ! is the viuty of the former cierk of the House to make out a roll, and the making out of that : roit is conclusive us to the prima facie right of 1 members to their seats, he will have the power : to bring into this body a majority of men who were never electt I—who, under the Con.-tilu ; tion and laws of the State, would have no right : whatever to occupy seats on this floor; whilst j the gentlemen who had received a majority of j tbe votes in their districts would be left to eon ; test the seats ot (hose who are foisted in by the cl ;k. and perhaps by the time that the rightful i members would be admitted all the important 1 legislation of the session would be transacted. | Now, 1 have always uink-rst'jod that it is a I mere matter of custom by which the clerk pre - j sides at the opening of the session, and until I the Speaker has been elected. In many Legis ' lata res of this Euion a temporary chairman is i i levied to preside until tiie organization of the Hi use is completed. Our custom ha# been dif euf. The clerk usually presides and reads the ,'etu nis as tin y are presented to him by the Score, arv *' le Commonwealth. Tiie House then p.'oci "ds to the election of Speaker and sub-re at) tly of clerk, because as this House is constituted H h" J Speaker or Cierk. At tne out *et of ny remarks, I said that il wc are to Br guide.4 by precedents, this whole question is clear ot difficulty. From the pa pers upon your dr-k. A appears that two gen tlemen present have the .certificate of a major ity of tlie return judge.'# of that legislative uis , triet—that the) arc (tie i gal.' V elected members ;or this House. Two other gentlemen present ! certificates signed by one re.l'irn judge oi tiuu | district. Now, whatever may* - >e I ' JC o ! '°mids i upon w hi'-b the admission ot' the ger; lleinen who ! have the certificate of the nmjoit'V ' ,,e re * turn judges may be objected to, tiac'cr 'he Con siituthm of the State and the laws regit hi ting this whole matter, those gentlemen ht ve pri ma fad-- right to seats upon this floor, lhe At torney General of tlie Commonwealth ii. <s.e eided, I believe, that a majority of the ret.urn j judges are competent to decide this whole m t- I ter, and that their action is conclusive as to tin" j prima facte right of members to tin ir seats. — . That, sir, lias been tiie uniform practice in Fenn j syivania. If there lias ever been an instance j ; in which it lias been departed from, (except j one,) I atu not aware of it. I believe that by ■ the action ot this 1 lous", three year# ago, gen ! tlemen were admitted to seats upon this floor, | upon the certificate of a minority of the return I judges. 1 then protested against that action, i as I now protest against this, as being revolu j tionary in its nature. I Now, provision is made under the Oonstitu ' tion, by which all these contested questions are ! to lie settled, arid the law has provided away in which every pussible allegation as to tiie right of a member to his seat can he properly settled. I take it, sir, that the gentlemen who present vertineates from a majority of the re turn judges—those return judges having dis charged their duties under the obligations im posed upon tlmm by the laws, they being the tribunal to determine in the first place who had a right to their certificate —the gentlemen, I j say, presenting certificates of that kind have a | right to their seats on this floor. The centle i men who come here with a minority eertifi. ate, • must proceed to show this House, in the way | appointed by the Constitution and the laws, I that they are entitled to seats. But we cannot, ! in this preliminary proceeding, go into an in ! vestigation connected with this election. i'lie \ returns of the majority must, in the first in- I stance, be conclusive- Mr. BROW&. Mr. Clerk, I ri#e for the TV! p i=e of making an alteration in the resoi j- Uun which I olrbred. I would strike out the words "discharg his duty by entering," and make it read as ioiiows : j Re. Ave I, That the Clerk be instructed to en ter upon the rolls of the House of Represent atives the names of the two gentlemen from 1 th- L- girintive district composed of the coun ties of Somerset, Bedford and Fulton, who, ac j cording to the papers in his hands, appear to have the highest number of votes- Mr. GUERNSEY. [A!).} Mr. Clerk, I ' move to amend the re#oluti m by substituting . the word "returns" for t ie wofd "papers." Mr. PERSHING. Mr. Clerk, I move to ' amend the amendment by striding out all alter Freedom of Thought and Opinion. BEDFORD, PA., FRIDAY MORNING, JANUARY 27, 1865. toe word "who" and inserting the words "ac cording to the certificate signed by a majority ot the return judges are certified to be elected members of this Houso." The resolution of the gentleman from Warren (Mr. Brown) takes for granted the whole question in controversy. We cannot determine the majority of the votes. Mr. Sil ARI'E. (Hem.) Ido not propose Mr. Clerk, to discuss the merits of this question. It appears to nie that the question as to which of the gentlemen are legally elected to repre sent the district comprising the counties of Bedford, Somerset and Fulton is- not properly before the House. The simple question to be decided by the House is which of these gentle men present to this House priuui facie evidence of election. The resolution as originally introduced by the gentleman from Warran instructs itic Clerks of tl.i- House to put upon tiie roll the names of the gentlemen who appear, by the papers in their possession, to have received the highest number of votes. That resolution,, in nty ap prehension, doe# not meat the dii'iicttfty ia tiits case, because he can easily ascertain who has the highest number of votes from the paiers that are legally certified as to the number of votes cast in that district. Now, tliPre are two papers presented to the Clerk, onc % of which is sent by one of the return judges, the other by two of the return judges of that district. Is there any gentleman upon either side of the chamber who will pretend to assert that the re- turn sent by thv minority is any return at all ? They know it to be true that .a report returned by a minority of return judges is no report at all. If that be the character of one of the pipers that is in possession ol' the Cferk, and if that paper is not illegal, how is it to be as eertained by the papers in the possession of tim Clerk which of these gentiemt n have received the highest number of votes ? Die only proper legal evidence in the possession of the Clerjc as lo lite re#uit of the election ir. this district, is the p.ijier sent by the majority. It is the only paper properly in the possession of the Clerk. It is ti.e only paper that iaw h >oks at, and there fore tli - only paper that this House can look at. I The Attorney General of this Commonwealth decided, the other day, that the action of the majority of the return judges, where twt> or more connth-s arc comprised m the same dis trict, constitutes the proper legal evidence as to the result of the election in that district and that the report of tiie minority is no evidence' at alt as to anything that appears on the face of the paper. Then the resolution ol the gen tleman i 'im Warren is a case of petitw pi tunpii ' —in this case, because the paper that he desir es the Clerk to base his judgment upon in this case is a paper having no legal existence at all, for the Cterk is to make up his return as to whichof thegentlemen have a majority of votes, and tie is to be hilornietl on 4is is point only by i the piper in hi# posse#.-ion from the majority of return judges in that district. Then, sir, I think that the resolution introduced by the gen tleman from Cambria is ttie onlv proper resolu tion that will moot this case. It is not a reso lution that looks into the merits of this rontro •! versyat all, hut a resolution which contemplates * | what has been done in cases similar to this, in , putting on the roll the names of those who came here with prutut fade evidence. 'J lie reavlution of the gentleman lrom Warren looks behind , the legal certificate, and I think no gentleman i in this body will stultify himself by saying that ■ the certificate signed by the minority of judges - is the legal certificate. That resolution attempts C to decide this question upon that which it pre ■ sumesto be tbe rnei;it# of tlie case, in oj posi tion to the Constitution of (hi# Commonwealth, which declares that the quo-lion can only be ' inquired into by a committee appointed by this . 1 body. J shall vote for (he resolution of tiie gcntle n* 'tn from Cambria because it is in accordance | wii.h a trimilar case and with the Constitution | an i I ws of the Commonwealth. Mi AVCLURE. ( At).) Mr. Clerk, we art about to esi'ibi 'sb a niu.-t important precedent) ami it become, u# to do so with due deliberation, i because I I flieve there lias never been before tics House a case that is in all respects similar, i or even hp Tjro.viuiating to this case in its most important (Natures, it has been held, sir, by ; our judicial tribunals, that several returns con stitute but ont return. There are, therefore, ; no papers (as t.bi# resolution seems to assert) before the llou-t or before the Clerk. There is simply a return in ide by tiie return judge# of this legislative, di-ti let. It is true, the judges do not agree in this re'urn, but nevertheless, tlie papers liefbra us all constitute one return, ami upon tiiaf return ti.e House must judge who shall prima facie be svvorn in as members. Now, sir, I desire to Ic-ok at tbe question a ' moment, because we are about to determine a precedent which shall hereafter operate alike upm all parties. The power fo arrest frauds in the returns rou-l lodge some where. The i gentleman from Cambria t.Ylr. Ceksuing) de ' i dares against the right of the clerk to assume j that he shall judge or exercise any power iu > fixing the rolls of this House. Therefore, if " return judges violate their oaths and the laws, ! and certify men as elected who are not elected ■ —as has been done in tiiis case by the majority i of these judges as the return upon its face shows* : —then, according to the doctrine of the gentle man from Cambria, there is no recourse wliat ' ever. This House lias no power except through I its clerk ; and therefore it mus. accept this fraud and take all fhe consequtnces. I beg to call * tiie attention of the gentleman from Cambria " (Mr PERSUING) to the fact that lie is here as -1 suminsr most perilous ground. If there is no power in ihi- House toguhrd against such frauds " of return judges, we simply opon wide the doors J and invite every return judge in the State, who snai! tie venial or corrupt, to thrust members into this House regardless of the votes of the * people. 1 grant, sir, that there is danger in lodg r 1 'Referring to the re'uia eigoed by one judge. ing this power anywhere, but it must rest some where. In the history of this State it has nev er been determined where that power shall rest. By courtesy or usage it has rested with the clerk, because there has been no such contest as this to raise the question and fix a precedent. I insist that the House in this case, shall de termine; first, tint the power shall not be in corrupt return judges, but that it shall be as noarly as possible in tbe house. The House lias some power over its own clerk. It may instruct the clerk. He perhaps, may not feel hound by such instructions, but I rather think the majority ot clerks would. If not from con victions of duty, certainly from courtesy the clerk should adhere to the instructions of the House, and .especially in a case of this kind, where there are but two members in dispute. The case supposed by the gentleman from Cambria (Mr. PERSHING) is one not likely to occur, unless his doctrine prevails—that a ma jority of the members of this House may be ruled but and placed in lite position of tbe gen tlemen from Somerset, Bedford and Fulton, it hi# doctrine should be accepted hs the doctrine of this House and the law of the State, and re turn judges be thus invited to return members as elected, regardless of the vote of the people, and according to their own political proclivities, then his apprehensions might be realized, and next year we should probably have the seats ol titty men contested. But that is not likely if this House shall exercise a wise, just an 1 e quitable supervLion over its own clerk and its own rules. Therefore, after carefully deliber ating upon this question, and regarding well tiie sac redness of a precedent which must here after tell upon alt parties, I believe that the power must be taken from the judges, so far as the action of this House is concerned, ves ted in the Lletk, so far as it must be vested iu auv clerk. Now, sir, when this is done what is the du ty of this House ? The Clerk does not choose to decide this question an l properly submit? it to the House for instruction. We do not pro pose (as the gentleman from Franklin, my col league, suggests) to examine into the merits of tliis question, and he is eq ially in error when he assume# that tiie Attorney General has de termined any such question at all. So far as he has reached this case, ho has simply expressed hi# opinion that there has been a monstrous fraud perpetrated by return judges in violation of their oath#, in seeking to subvert the fairly and constitutionally expressed will of tiie peo ple. lie lias decided rliat the Governor, in tliis exercise of a nureK ministerial duly, (for he cannot reach the merits of the case,) must be bound by tlie record. He cannot inquire at all intii the legality of any vote, nor can he in quire whether the return judges have rejected a part of the vote. As a ministerial officer lie is bound to accept that which, upon its face, is a legal return, and upon thai he must issue his proclamation. But this.House is not governed !>v such l ulcs. VVc are exercising no minister ial duty. We are here to decide, as nearly as we can, a doubtful question. And we have the right to reach tiie merits of the case, so far as the returns before us present it. We have pri marily no right to assume that any part of these return# i# 1 gal or illegal, but we have the right to go to the record itself to discover who have, by % the record, received a majority. That record clearly shows that Messrs. Ross and Armstrong have received a majority of the votes polled. There is the record In-fore us—a part of the return itself. Without determining, in thi# primary bearing, whether that vote i# legal or illegal, we are simply to determine that those gentlemen are entitled to bo called, and I shall vote to instruct tlie Clerk accordingly. 1 am well aware that gentlemen will insist that tbi# is reaching the merits of the question. It is not at all reaching the merits of the ques tion. lam simply seeking to guard against a deliberate, and what I must pronounce, a mon strous fraud upon this House and upon the peo ple of a certain legislative district; and so far a# this llott#e is able, without seeking to con travene right-or iaw. it ought to interpose boldly, and say that these things shall not he done.—■ Because, if they are done in this case, they may be repeated next year in forty cases, and we shall then, bv th'# act of tolerating fraud, bring rev olution upon our Legi#lature. It is not we who see,': to "revolutionize: those seeking to sanction fraud upon technical grounds, are those who seek to revolutionize this Legislature. Why, sir, there is not a man who has ad dressed this House —neither my colleague from Franklin, (Mr. Snurpe,) nor the gentleman front Cambria, (Mr. Rer.-iiing,)— l wiio will pretend to say that the return juade by the single judge lrom Somerset is not tiie true return from that district. They cannot pretend to say to tliis lliiuse that the Democratic candidates for the Legislature in that district, evert by the return of their own county judges, had a majority of the votes cast. Their own judges counted them out; their own judges certified the return that counted them out. The return judges of Ful ton county unanimously signed tlie return. All the return judges of Bedford county, except six, signed the returns. And the returns signed by every judge who is in harmony with the gentlemen on the other side of the House count their own iuen,bers out by over one hundred majority. The facts touching this question are facts of record. Bear in mind that it is not pretended that these men are elected; it is simply claimed by technicality, having its origin in fraud. I grant, sir, that it all the judges bad made this return, and the House had no other evidence, we should lie bound to call and swear iu the men whose names might be on the return. But, fortunately, that is not the case here. We have, by the very record before us, conclusive evidence that they are seeking to perpetrate a fraud upon this House; and, therefore, I sha'l vote so to in#truct the C'erk that this fraud shall not succeed—that tbis Houso shall not sanction, directly or indirectly, any such fraud. Without reaching the merits of the contest in WHQEE XUIIBEK, 3094 any way, judging this question as a precedent most solemn in its nature, judging it solely by the facts vvhiuh the record raises for otircon siderati >n, judging it by the return (which is the proper word, instead of "papers,") this House is bound by law and bound by equity to say that the, men who, by the returns, have a clear majority of the vote of the district, shall be called and shall be sworn. Mr. i'EUSHING. Mr. Clerk, Ido not want to protract this discussion; but this is the first time that I have ever heard it said that gentle men who come here, complying with all the requisitions of the law—presenting a certificate signed by a majority of the district, are perpe trating a fraud upon the House. It seems, sir, that the gentleman from Franklin (Mr. M'Clure) occupies a much more "perilous" position in regard to this question than I. We are not yet in a position to investigate this question of fraud; and helms made a matter of allegation what must necessarily be a matter for investi gation. Allegation is not to govern hero, but law and precedent are to gowrn in the deter mination of this question. I agree with him that this is a matter of very great importance. IVe ought now to establish a precedent, or rath er we ought not to violate alt the precedents of the past. j Now, what is the p - Lion ! Why, that one return judge, refusing to sign the return made by his "olleagues whether they lie three or a dozen, has a right to send his return he e, an 1 that the return of that one judge is to be taken in pre ference to the return of all the other judges as sociated with him. Tbnt is simply the position ; of the gentleman from Franklin (Mr. M'CrxttK ) The firet, lie savs, shows that Messrs. Meyers and Findlay were not elected. The second, the only legal return here, shows that they were elected. And the question, as he presents it, ' is simply this: Whether a minority shall have j more power in the discharge of their duties than j a majority. We are not to impute peijury to j these men. The two gentlemen who signed the certificate returning* Messrs. Meyers and Find : lay are equally responsible and respectable with | the other judge. They come here with just as j high a reputation and with just as much evi dence that they have discharged their duty, as do the other gentlemen. It is the gentleman i from Franklin who occupies the "perilous" position, whi!.-; I follow all the precedents and the lettei of the law itself. But, he s tys there is n > rem vly! Certainly there is a remedy. If these return judges a gainst whom he makes these serious charges are guilty of the offence, the law prov i lea for their punishment. If through their corrupt agency, a# he allege#, men are brought upon this floor who have no right to seats, tiie law h"s provi ded away for their expulsion. lam for follow ing the law —following the precedents as they are now laid down. Let ns have an investiga tion; let the guilty be punished, but let us not act upon a mere matter of allegation. The very case which the gentleman alleges is thus provided for: "Every petition, as aforesaid, complaining of an undue election or a false return of a mem ber of the House of Representatives, shall be delivered," Ac. There is tlie remedy provided; and we are j not left in the situation which the gentleman ! from Franklin (Mr. McClure) imagines when J we follow law and precedent and the clerk a dopts a uniform practice. The only question is whether we shall follow the beaten path and make a new precedent which may hereafter oc casion very great mischief-—by which one of the return judges may modify the act of a dozen. Mr. SHARPE. Mr. Clerk, in the remarks which I previously ma le. 1 carefully avoided any accusation of fraud in this matter; but my colleague from Franklin (Mr. McClure) has sta ted in broad terms that the record before this House shows that Mr. Ross and Mr. Armstrong had,a majority of the votes in that district.— Now, niv colleague from Franklin says that the record proves that fact. If i understand the paper- - in the possession of the clerk, there are j two different returns, one of which shows that > Meyers and Findlay have a majority, and the \ other that Ross and Armstrong have a majori ty. The question is which of these papers is the record in tiiis case? x\nd that brings up an other question—what is necessary to constitute j a record in this case? Does mv colleague from Franklin pretend to say that a minority of the ! return judges can make a record ? Does he pre tend to stultify himself by saying that a minor ity of the return judges of a district can over ride a majority' If lie lakes that position, he overrules a decision which the Attorney Gen eral of the Common wealth made in a case aris ing in this very district, and with which ha is ju>f as familiar as I am. In that decision, al though Mr. lvoor.tz, the Republican candidate for Congress, had his certificate signed by a mi nority of the judges of that district, the Attor ney General declared that that was no certifi cate at all—that it was no evidence of any thing that was set forth upon its face. Now, sir. apply that doctrine to this case to the case of the returns signed Ly the single judge—and I ask the gentleman from Franklin, (McClure,) and I ask every member upon that side ot the chamber, is that a record that this House is to be governed by ? Can one man make a record 'which contradicts the record made by the only parties that the law recognizes as hav ing the right to make the record as to election in that district? Does he pretend to sav that one man can make a record in opposition to the record made by a majority of his colleagues, when qualified in law to make a record? Then, if he cannot make a record which contradicts the record of his colleagues, there is but one record in possession of the clerk, and that shows iliat Meyers and Findlay have received a rna joritv of the votes in the district. I 'lid not intend to enter into the question of fraud, but I dislike the allegation of fraud coming from my colleague nc this carlv stage of the investigation. There is no evidence of fraud before the House. The charge of fraud rests upon the naked allegation of toy colleague, unsustained by a single scintilla of evidence, because the only record in the possession o! the House shows that Messrs. Meyers and Findlay are the legal members of this House. The whole difficulty arose from a 'troubler in Isra el" interfering with the proper discharge of the duties of the return judges of Bedford eoanty. As my colleague from Franklin well knows, the judges were proceeding to perform their du -1 ties properly when a third part}' chose to step ! in and dictate as to a certain kind of pertorm ! ance of duty which ought to govern a certain part of the return judges, anJ there was th commencement of this whole difficulty. But that is a question which ought to be investiga ted betore a committee, and not in this House. The only question, as 1 apprehend, before this House, is which of these papers is the record f I say that the paper signed by a majQrily of the return judges is the record and the ogly record. I hat record shows that Messrs. Ross and Armstrong are not elected; but that Messrs- Meyers and Findlay are elected. Mr. M CLL'KE Mr. Clerk, my colleague , front Franklin, (Mr. Sharpe), and the genlle- I man from Cambria, (Mr. Pershing,) are both i quite mistaken in.assuming that I have asked ! this House to receive the certificate of a single i return jddge as the return. I have not done so, and allow me at the outset simply to state that the remedy proposed by the gentleman from Cambria, (Mr. Pershing,) in the case of alleged frauds or falsa return of votes, dos not help us cere. There uns jal*> return before this House. I hold and stated as distinctly as the English language could make it, that the return made by the judge for Somerset county is a /jart ot this return. A conflict is thus presen ted upon the face of this return, and therefore is not the false return contemplated in the act of Assembly. If all the judge# from the three counties of this district had signed the same return, declaring the votes wrongfully, that would be a false return and the House would be bound to ticcept it- But this case is most essentially different. The inquiry is presented upon tlie face of the return itself wherein is it right and wherein is it wrong. The gentleman from Cambria, and every gentleman in tliis House who knows anything about it. knows that the return made by the single judge is cor rect. —Bear in mind that they do not assume to contradict the statement made by this single return judge; they carefully avoid saying any thing of that sort. VOL. 8, NO. *26. Mr. !I.\KLS. (Dem.) Mr. Clerk, the mo ment we attempt to discuss this question upon its merits, we shall have to consi ler the whole case or make such suggestions as are entirely incompatible with our duties—such as this al ligation of traud. Now, we are not to allege fraud; we are not to suppose? any fraud; we have no legal evidence before us what the facts arc. i his House, as a body, cannot decide this question upon its merits; neither can the clerk decide it upon its merits. I speak now of the legal merits, the merits which the law requires to give a man a permanent seat. That can on ly he done by a committee of the House select ed for that special purpose, with a special oath administered, and having the power to send for persons and papers, and collect all the evidence. Acting here upon onr general oath, we cannot decide it. We are nnt permitted to do so. The law has appointed other ways in which this must be done. Neither is it necessary to decide this case up on its merits. 1 his is simply a preliminary or ganization, and it canntot be decided now who are entitled to seats under the returns of the return judges. Now, in the absence of any le gal evidence which the law requires to decide the matter permanently, we must take the ev idence before us. What is that? Why, the evidence that a majority of return judges have certified that Messrs. Meyers and Kindlay are entitled to seats. That evidence is entirely competent for t lie clerk to act upon. And it may be doubted whether the House has any thing to say about it; whether it is not a mat ter of duty for the clerk to act upon the evi dence, in this case, as he does in every other case where he enrolls a member, and to decide whose names are to be enrolled upon the rolls. I do not know that the gentleman from Frank lin upon my right. (Mr. M'Clure) had a com petitor. But, suppose he had ; suppose some person had the audacity to run against him, as they do against other gentlemen, and that a majority of return judges had certified that he was entitled to his seat. I want to know if lie would willingly give up that seat in the pre liminary organization when a single return judge certified that he was not entitled to his scat. Why. sir. we may all tremble if it be estab lished here that in our preliminary organiza tion a single return judge may, in the face of a majority, oust a man from his seat. We can not tell who shall be safe. No, sir, no one will pretend that a minority of return judges Irom any district can give sucK a certificate as will entitle any member to his seat here in the preliminary organization. It is absolutely im possibly. Nothing but a majority of return judges can give a valid certificate. [Now, sir, I arn not in favor of instructing the clerk. Ido not think it competent for the Iluuse to instruct him what he shall uo, in this hehalt. I appreciate the motives of the clerk in ask ins instructions, but how is it possible tor the House to gis'e the clerk instructions? fo do that we must decide upon the merits of the case as it now stands in the papers before the clerk for his inspection. And if the clerk takes the liberty, or assumes the right to say that a majority of return judges is no evidence, is no prima facie evidence upon which he can enroll a niemlier, then he must take the respon sibility, and if he decides thai a single judge, in spite ot the majority, can give a member or members seats in this Hous* in the preliminary organization, so be it. I am willing to leave that entirely with the clerk: but us he asks our opinion, I have no hesitation in saying that there is but one tiling for the cle-k to look at, and but one tiling for the House to look at; and that is the fact that Meyers and Findiay have a certificate of a majority of return judges. The. House then voted upon Mr. Pershing's amendment, which was lost by a strict party vote, 3t> ayes to oS noes, all the Democrats voting in the affirmative and the Abolitionists ; in the negative ; thus deciding that the certifi cate of QHC return judge (provided he be an ab ' oiiiionist) is better e\ idence of an election thiut jthat of two, provided they are Democrats. "I think," said a farmer, "I should make a good congressman, lor 1 use their language. I received two bills the ether day. with a re quest for immediate payment. The one I or dered to be laid on the table, the other to bo read that day six months "
Significant historical Pennsylvania newspapers