The Bedford gazette. [volume] (Bedford, Pa.) 1805-current, 1865-01-20
Our Franklin County Mentor.

Our Franklin County Mentor
Mr.. A. X. Mcclure, editor of the Franklin
Repository, some time ago, kindly undertook the
Office of mentor to the people of Bedford coun-
tv. For months he leetured them upon their
duties as citizens, but, finding that they would
not listen to his sage counses, and that in spite
of all he could do and say, they tcould give
largely increased vote against his party, he fell
TO scoIding them ''like very drab," and, now
Diaued more than ever at their intractahleness,
he threatens even to go to law with them! lhe
objects of his special aversion seem to be the
Return Judges of this county. Read the Re-
positorp for the past three months and you Will
inevitably come to the conclusion that the edl-
tor of that paper, has Return Jadge on the
By1ir. The reason of this strange disturbance
in the mind of Mr.. Mcclure, on the subject OF
Bedford county Return Judges, is the fact that
those return Judges were so oescuTed as 10 their
vision, that they could not see the beauties OF
the system introduced partly, 10y that great
moral and political reformer, A X. McClure}
which puts in the minority, majority OF voters,
by the getting up of election returns which
bear upon the face of them the stamp OF llie-
caGty and fraud In the last weeks Repository,
we have his latest instaiment on this topic In
an article of column and quarter in length,
he undertakes to show why the abolition men,
bers of the House did not do wrong in refusing
10 regard the certificate Of tCo return Judges as
Of his lucubrations, he utters the following deiib
crate falsehoods:
!. ''The record evidence before the caucus
showed that MIR. Meyers was defeated 10y over
100 yotes.''
GThe only legal record evidence in the case,
was the certificate of Meyers election, by t,CO
Of the three return judges. But, we presume
this was not brought before the caucus.
2 ''The Democratic return judges rejected
l39 of the army vote and counted the remain
der, something over 800"
THE Democratic return judges did no such
thing, They did not reject single vote certi-
fed 10 them by the Prothonotary. They did
count the whole army vote, as certified By the
Prothoaotarp, whereupon the abolition return
judges, in violation of law, refused to sign the
return and withdrew from the convention
Although the Democratic return judges, in or
der to fulfil the duties imposed upon them by
law, did thus count the army vote, their action
was not binding upon any person, and was not
10 regarded by majority Of them, owing to
the fact that the law requires that all the return
Judges present shall sign the retrn.
3. "When the three return Judges met in
Bedford to perform their duty and compute the
aggregate vote as certified by the judges of the
several countless nlr. Meyers and his friends
had resolved to improve in the matter of the
rejection of army votes, and accordingly the
two Judges FROM Fulton and Bedford were ma
nipulated until they rejected the ,chols of the
army vote in Bedford and Fulton, and thus gave
Messrs. Meyers and Findlay an apparent ma
ioriry This act was consummated by Mr..
Meyers and his friends, by compelling sworn
district judges, TO reject part of the very vote
they had accepted as correct, &c, &C.
TFalse, from beginning to end. The Fulton
and Bedford return judges were not compel
ed" by any one. to do any thing They are
not men Of wax. like those you are accnstom-
ed to use, Mr.. Mcclure. They had determin-
sd upon their course before they came to Bed
ford, aud that was, to leare the counting Of the
army rote Of Bsdford county, 30 a committee rails
ed 6y tie House, according to iarO, upon petition
praying for an Investigation Of the right to seats
IN that body, Of tie persons ,rhOm they should retton
as elected. They had before them no return of
the army vote of Bedford county; because, to
constitute return, all the return judges present
must sign it, and in this case nearly one-haif
of them had not signed it. Nor did they deem
il lawful and right to give the certificate Of e.
lection TO persons, who according to the returns
before them, had not received the highest num-
Der of votes, simply because it was claimed
that those persons had received votes not COM
puted in the county returns. This they regard
ed, as before stated, as a subject for investiga-
tion upon.a petition for contest. Hence, they
gave certificates Of election to Meyers and Find