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 "