Bedford inquirer. [volume] (Bedford, Pa.) 1857-1884, 1865-08-04

4
county. Tour committee viii speak more
particularly of this conduct or action, in
subsequent part of this report
Only fifty zone soldiers votes were return
ed to Fulton county. OF these the return
Judges rejected the two largest returns
numbering twenty-five votes and giving
majority of nine votes, and counted twenty
SIX soldiers votes. 1t was non pretended
that any vote Of the ffty-one had been cast
by any person not a lawful aud qualified yo-
ter, but the reflections were based entirel,
upon 'informality in the returns. TO the
county Of Bedford the votes of FIVE hundred
and forty-six soldiers were returned, Herr
the task of rejecting votes seems to have
been chiefly committed to, or at least as
sUmed by Oliver n. Shannon, Esq, the
pr0thon0tary He acted AZ both Judge and
! jury At an early hour of Friday morning,
treturn day, he notified Mr., Cessna, attor-
ney for General William n Koontz, can
dldate for Congress, that B. I. Meyers and
George ii. Spang, Esqrs, attorneys fol
General A. H. Coffroth the other candidate
for Congress, had notified him Mr. Shan
non, not 10 certify certain soldiers returns
and that he had consented to hear their ar
\ guments at ten o clock, A. NJ, of that day.
where Mr.. Cessna might appear for General
koontz if he saw fit The hearing took
place. Mr.. Cessna protested against the
jurisdiction Of the court, and the whole ques-
| ton was argued for period of two hours.
pr. Shannon rejected two returns, contain
ing one hundred and thirty votes, and
| giving a majority of forty-fve votes The
| board of return judges of Bedford county
| subsequently, by vote of thirteen to SIX,
sustained this action. They then, by the
same vote, counted the other soldiers re-
! turns for the county, to the number of four
hundred and seven. Every one of the thir-
teen judges signed this return The six
Judges not agreeing TO this return then made
] out and seyerally signed a separate return
! for Congress- embracing every vote of the
four hundred and seven counted by the ma
iorlty, and also including the one hundred
and thirty-nine votes rejected or Withheld by
/ the prothonotary. The ground upon which
! these two returns were rejected was that
/ there were names upon the list Of voters
returned of citizens, who, when at home
/ did not reside in Bedford county 1t APP
peared, IN evidence, that one of these returns
contained the names of thirty seven citizens
OF Fulton county, but it appeared, from the
same return, that no more votes were given
/ for Bedford county officers than there were
names of Bedford county voters on the list,
and 1t was admitted and proved that Fulton
| county was a part Of the same Congression-
| al, judicial and Legislative district 1t was
also proved and admitted that these thirty
seven persons were duly qualified voters of
Fulton county, and that their votes had not
been returned 70 Fulton county. for either
Congress, Judge or Assembly.
The other rejected return contained the
names of sixty voters. OF these, forty eight
were citizens of Bedford county, sixteen of
kaalterls an Of AI-a.stiaassaosa asa 1lA.ia
/ No more than forty eight votes were return
1 ed TO Bedford for any county Office, only fif-
! ty-four for Judge, fifty two for Congress and
| fifty for Assembly. The other votes, about
six, were returned to Huntingdon and. Cam
| bria, for the respective candidates in those
counties. Itis but proper 10 state here,
| that these sixty voters were all members of
/ the same company, belonging to one organ
| ization, and serving in the army of the
James, at the time of the election The
other rejected return came from body of
j drafted men, all then quartered at barracks,
/ No. j, IN Washington city. In short 1t was
at no time pretended that any single vote of
all those rejected was cast by any person not
entitled to vote. On the contrary, it was
most clearly and distinctly proved by all the
witnesses called upon both sides, including
! @. III. Spang, ESD, one of the attorneys for
| Gen. A Ia. Coffroth, that every soldier of
the entire five hundred and forty-six, re-
| turned to Bedford. was a qualified voter,
and that the only objection was as TO the
manner Of making the RETURNS.
| Mr.. Shannon appeared ueiore your COM
! mittee, called, examined and eross-examined
witnesses, and furnished a written statement
of bis views, in defence of his action His
entire defence rested upon his view of the
\ eighteenth section of the act of 1864, Tegl-
lating elections by soldiers, &c. Even here
he gave force only to the word such, be-
| fore returns. That section of the law
prescribes the duty Of prothonotaries in Ger
1 utylng such returns, evidently meaning
returns from soldiers inactual service. But
/ Mr. Shannon insists that it, In any particular
the returns should not be precisely such, y
as directed by the act of Assembly, then it
was not his duty to certify them, and that he
was sole judge of the matter, and had dis
cTetionary power to Withhold or certify all
papers which he might conclude were or
were not such returns. He, and the
judges, appear to have entirely disregarded
1 that part of the twenty-s6yenth section OF
1 the same act, which declares that mo mere
| informality in the manner of carrying out or
executing any of the provisions of this act,
shall inyalidate any election held under the
same or authorize the return thereof to be
rejected or set aside.
To expose the folly and wickedness of the
action of this prothonotary aud these judges
would be waste of time. The case only
needs TO be presented.
The great end and aim of the law were to
| insure, TO the soldier on duty, the exercise
of that elective franchise which was enjoyed
| by his fellow citizens at home The Consti-
/ tuition of the State guaranteed this to him.
/ The people of the State declared, by a ma
1 iority cf nearly one hundred thousand at the
! ballot box, that he should be permitted to
/ exercise this right While these one hun
dred and thirty-nine soldiers were carrying
/ the flag of the country. and defending her
cause at the time these votes were being
counted, petty tyrant, like the prothono-
| tary ofa county, by malignity or stupidity,
assuming, to himself, powers and jurisdic-
ton which did not belong to him, overtum
their viii, and absolutely disfranehise the
whole number.
/ Much of the evidence went to convict Mr.
| Shannon of bad faith in the premises. He
called as a witness, Major ID. Washabaugh,
to prove that he sent to Harrisburg to get
these returns, or an explanation of them, SO
chat Gas he alleged) they might be counted.
But, unfortunately for him, his witness
! testified that full and satisfactory explana-
ton had been discovered and made to him.
These returns were duly copied, certified by
the Secretary of the Commonwealth, and
said copies handed to Mr.. Shannon on the
day before the meeting of the return judges.
i A roin aftar tho aro11ruonf hafora him on