The Bedford gazette. [volume] (Bedford, Pa.) 1805-current, 1866-02-23

in relation to the certifying, signing,
and returning with the pOll-book the
| evidence of the administering the oath
| to the officers of the election sections
4 and 15) was wholly disregarded. lSee
also on this point the case Of Blair Us.
| Barrett. Bartlett's Contested Election
Gases, page 3l5, and cases there cited J
So also in the case Of company {. 2O2d
regiment, paper >, where only one
judge Of election appears to have been
appointed that the return was invalid,
| sections / and A. the law expressly re-
quiring three. tSee also Howard rs
Cooper, Bartlett's Contested Election
| Gases. page 282.J The returns of COM
pany !, 2l0th regiment tpaper 3d. do
not show that two of the judges or the
clerks were sworn, q certificate of which
the law fsectiOns > and l5) expires ly re-
quires. (See also case Of Blair rs. Bar
rett. above cited. The returns for COM
panies B and c, l38th regiment, paper
80, show that these two companies V0-
ted together at one poll and having the
same election officers, both judges and
clerks. The law lsectiOn q directs that
a poll shall be opened in each company,
and that all electors belonging to such
company, and within one mile Of the
quarters on the day of election, and by
orders, DC, from returning to the quar-
tiers, shall vote at such poll. The return
shows officers Of both companies par
ticipating in the election, indicating
regular company organizations, and
does not set forth any of the facts 10
bring the electors within any OF the
exceptional clauses of the statute, sec
tiOns ,, 81, and 36.l The returns for
company B, Dist Pennsylvania cavalry,
either show the judges and clerks of e.
lection to have been sworn before one
James Mickey, who was not an officer
of the election and had no authority
(sectiOn 81 20 administer such oath, or
else that neither of the judges or clerks
Of election were sworn, and in either
case is in violation Of the law, sections
) and b. The pOll-bOOk or list of elec
tors voting tsaid election is not certi-
fed as required by law, section 10, nor
were separate pOll-bOOks kept or separ-
ate returns made section = for the VO-
ters Of each city or county; but it would
appear from what is claimed to have
been intended for a list Of the electors,
that there were fOrty-fOur whose names
and residence are given -four from
Franklin county, one from York, and
thirty-nine from Adams cOunty-WhIle
forty-One votes are certified as cast for
representative in Congress, being two
more than there were electors for Adams
county.
The remaining return for Adams
county, company X, l84th regiment,
paper 3O) being - for Coffroth and 80
for KOOntZ, would not, if it had been
counted. have changed the result, but
would still have left a majority of 20
for Mr.. Coffroth. There are other OBJ
jections which might be raised to the
legality of many Of said returns so pre-
sented but the foregoing are instanced
as apparent on a first inspection. How
many of these objections might be re-
moved by other evidence on full hear
ing upon the merits the committee are
not now called upon to say, nor do they
know what the facts may be which re-
late to the validity of the elections so
held, and as to which the returns ap-
pear to be so defective. But these re-
turns, whether legal or not, are not
proper to be considered on this investi-
CATION. When on aCOntest on the mer-
its the facts may be fully developed, if
any legal votes are found to have been
omitted in the count, full and final jus
tice may then be done both to the vO-
ters and to the respective claimants;
but until such an investigation is had,
the committee. on the question Ofa prl-
maJdcje right to the seat feel cOnstrain-
ed toabide byth0se eprecedentsand rules
of law which experience has proved to
be the safest guides in weighing and de-
termining impartially questions of this
nature.
The committee therefore recommend
the adoption Of the following reSolu-
tions:
ReSOired, That Alexander II. Cof-
fr0th, upon the certificates and papers
relating to the election in the sixteenth
congressional district of the State of
Pennsylvania, has the prjBld .fdcje right
to the vacant seat from that district,
and is entitled to take the oath of Office
and occupy q seat in this house as the
representative in Congress from said
district, without prejudice to the RIG ht
of William II. kOOntZ, claiming TO have
his right to said seat upon the merits.
ReS0lred, That William II. koontz,
desiring to contest the right of honor
able Alexander IL. COffrOth to seat in
this house as a representative from the
sixteenth district of the State of Penn
sylvania, be, and heis, required to serve
upon the said Coffroth, within fifteen
days after the passage of this resolution,
particular statement of the grounds
of said contest, and that the said COf-
frOth be and ne is hereby required to
serve upon the said kOOntz his answer
thereto within fifteen days thereafter,
and that both parties be allowed sixty
daVs next after the service OF said an
sWer to take testimony in support of
their several allegations and denials,
notice of intention to examine witness
eS to be given to the opposite party at
least five days before their examination,
but neither party to give notice of TAX
ing testimony within less than five days
between the close of taking it at one
place and its commencement at anOth-
er, but in all other respects in the man
ner prescribed in the act of February
10, 1851. CHARLES UPSON,
II. l.. DAWES,
PORTUS BANTER,
S. S. MARSHALL,
VIM. RADFORD.
IMMIGRATION IN 1S66.-According
to every indication the emigration to
the United States this year will bevery
l.