Bedford inquirer. [volume] (Bedford, Pa.) 1857-1884, 1866-01-05

of Sheriff one or the other Of whom is un-
doubtedly elected refuse To approve OF the
sureties OF both, and turn each over to a
contest against the other making each a
/ contestant and a defendant at thesal time.
/ The Act Of the I'd Of Jdly 1899 directs
! the clerks Of the return judges in the pres
4 ence Of the board To add together the num-
4 ber of votes which shall appear by the GER
1 tibcates to have been given for any person or
Fperson- ~ respect to each Office or station
Tie clerks are then. in the presence OF the
judges, 90 make out returns which are TO be
4 signed by all the judges present, and attest
/ ed by the clerks
The direction thus given 20 add together
I the number Of votes. which upon the face OF
! the certificates appear 10 have been east for
each person voted for and to make out re-
/ turns, lock 10 one 'eturn or certificate Of e.
! lection ased upon he computation Of votes
and not two 0r mere different returns Of O.
lection for the same Office, for the law con
! tempiated the election of but one person,
who shall have received the highest number
Of votes for the Office designated. we are
| therefore, required to regard the two papers
q, one, they profess to be Of the same char
acter to have been executed on the same
day. are signed in part by the same return
| judges, and purport to be the act o. the
same board, and relate to the same end,
namely, the election ofa Sheriff for the city
aud county Of Philadelphia If there are
contradictions, We must reconcile them If
We can, and If this cannot lie done, we must
decide Il ,cOrding to the legal intendment of
the facts found by the said Judges, setting
within the scope of their legitimate author
ity
And here let me remark, that although
this certificate was given to Mr. Ewing by
reason Of the soldiers vote notwithstanding
/ fifteen Judges out of twenty four had signed
a@t]ust him and he was sworn into Office,
/ yet in the subsequent contest of Thompson
| aoainst Ewing, a large portion of these sol
! diers votes were found to be Illegal and
We're rejected, the contest Was decided III
favor of Thompson who was finally awarded
the Office and served his time out a. Sheriff
oi the county,
The Chairman asked how the two papers
could lee put together and made intelllgI-
lf. Cessna You have all the facts IN
our case The returns show precisely what
votes have been lefi ont of the count and
for what reason. The return from Adams
county, for instance, states that certain pa
pers containing q certain number Of votes
had been left out not being legally certified
to. But TO proceed, ! read further from
the Saue case. page 31+ we are, there
fore required TO hold that the two papers
called returns, are in fact but one return
and as they show that Robert Ewing haC
the highest number of votes, that his prinb
fj,cte riaht to have his securities justified il
thus established, for we are to look at th
substance af these4T4f1r 90 .. c0iitTfsl6h mo
tlar tzru question which we have been re
quiled to decide
Now then. l repeat, that | care not whicl
view you adopt, whether you decide tha
the Two papers shall be put together anl
considered rs one and you form your con
cnSlons from them or whether YOU adop
the Y.cw, that they form a contradictory
and unlntelllglbie return, that the Judge,
having divided where they bad no right t.
divide, their action Is consequently null and
VOID. and you must 90 back therefore to the
next papers, behind which are the return.
from the several election boards in the dis
trict
Now for fear that my own feelings and
political opinions might influence NV iudg-
nIentin this matter | have consulted an
eminent counsel not connected with thi,
! case, a gentleman who is well known to us
III Pennsylvania aud throughout the country
as an eminent iuriSt and who is also equally
well known as being emphatically opposed
to my client in his political views. desire
to trcspass uJon the time of the Committee
1 by reading his opinion.
4 memCer OF the Committee asked the
pane of the counsel referred to.
~. Cessna Il have no objection to Civ
! Inc his name if The COMMITTEES desire it.
I Il Is Hon. Jeremiah ) Black, formerly At
torney General of the United States.
VI. fuher.-An opinion given in this
/ cl@s
.Bf Gsaa. Yes sir.
III. Falter.--We object TO that being Civ
en- rs authority.
III Ce&aa-I VII read it as a pant of
my remarks
The opinion of Judge Black was here
| read 1t argues that the District return
and the returns from Bedford and Adams
| counties We're absolutely null and void and
that the House must now do what the com
ty itad District judges should have done. to
wiz collect and add up the District returns
fora pr,ma Jdcje case.
.H,> tp@oa asked IL it was claimed that
thrnrlginaI returns made by The inspectors
ot each precinct were before the Committee?
.Hr. (fssad. From every disputed pre-
emit they are. You have them in this way:
In Adams county they met and certified to
he return of the hone vote for the whole
county. That is here, Ia the same county
they made two returns Of the soldier votes;
one, igned by majority OF the Judges in
which they say distinctly that they reject
eight returns-lwo hundred and eight votes:
the other Includes these soldier ; votes In
Bedford, you have before you these returns:
one OF the entire home vOre; another signed
b, a majority OF the judges of the county
CO utyiug to a portion p. the otdlef' votes.
buC excluding two returns OF 80 votes, and
q other including these returns /. agree
thatitis better 80 consider al these returns
ON which ihe judges divided as Illegal, null
and void a~ furnishing no evidence oil re-
turn: anu It he Committee take that view.
the paprrs are before them which will ena
bic thrm 20 back aud arrive at safisfac-
torye'mcu lon without difficulty as to who is
griHtJ iit-is enti tied To the seat
M 7Sc6gfeid asked how contested elec-
lions were settled in ths Pennsylvania Leg
islatuge.
III. cS@sa. by Il committee chosen BY
lo, ana he report Is iiaal That Is "a trisu-
i,. FNnI b., aw, aud e House does nor
"a, u!g'u ileil eFoF 1t all
ii4erH aee >cverai u5her bsnnrhes ul fh
ci- wlH.,!i SHAH no; lay1 tiav t rc4cii |
sirii! ~. undertake IA ~hnw de Committee
how "a reach Il lorjata foit eqse That j.,
uiliIenty explained a .jaGee Black. and il
wlatd he u waste ei time iol me to under
take 10 explain 1t furshvE / say with,uB
fear OF contradiction that there Is no houd
oi rayas ers known to the law 1T P.n.syl