Bedford inquirer. [volume] (Bedford, Pa.) 1857-1884, 1866-01-05
VOLUME 80; NO. /.

or a district board, or any body else. to add
to or subtract from tie esult so counted. is
an attempt to perpetrate fraud upon the
voice Of the people, and is not allowed or re-
cognized any where by any law of our. Com
monwealth And | say that any act by any
other tribunal interfering with that count or
attempting TO settle that question is ALSO
utely null and void. | think can give you
a little further authority on that subject /
repeat the proposition that while for certain
purposes legislative bodies aud judicial
bodies in Pennsylvania may act By maori-
ties, ministerial officers cannot read from
/ the reports OF this same Court in Philadel
| phia IN the case of Lawrence VS.. Knight
! p $50.
+ The Prothonotary of the Court is merely
Che agent to send these military returns t.
the return judges. and they are merely the
/ agents to cast up these returns.
'ln the same case, page 800, Judge Lud-
low, in giving directions to the Prothonota
ny, says: Your office is simply ministerial.
You are to open the papers received by you
and examine them, to discover if they CON
tain the company returns, and if paper
presents Itself to your notice which yon are
satisfied is a palpable forgery, and therefore
ljoyetlfgH, it is not paper of which you can
take auy uoticc: but If the paper is of doubt
tul authenticity, it may be "a return, and
! you are not t0jndge upon the validity Of any
such document
/ read this because in this Bedford county
matter the Prothonotary OF the county with
/ held from the board two returns and the
judges Of that county BY a majority vote
sustained him He gives you his reasons
and desire YOU to examine them. For in
H. e
fed voters because six of these men reside
in counties out of the district, although
/ these votes were returned to their own coun-
| ties and not to Bedford There are fifty
/ tour men upon that roll, not one of whom
4 1t has been pretended was not legally quail
/ iiied voter Of that District and yet this man
/ setting himself up as court and jury, rejects
/ them all because six others had voted with
/ them and We're carried over to the county
I where they lived And these fifty-four
! men were thus disfranchised by the majori-
I ty of that board Of judges. Now let me
read few words about the duties of judges.
The 57th Section Of the Act of Assembly of
/ 18th August 1864, contains these words:
No mere informality in the manner of
carrying out, or executing, any ofithe proyis-
ions Of this act, shall invalidate any election
held under the same, or authorize the re-
turns thereof TO be rejected or set aside. |
insist that this provision is binding upon
Prothonotaries, upon County boards, upon
District boards, u1on the Governor, upon
the Clerk of the Louise, upon all tribunals
established by law, for the trial Of contested
elections, and that it is a command impera-
tive upon this Committee and the House
Ia the Philadelphia case, page Sol, the
Court in speaking OF return judges uses the
following language: "The duties of these
gentlemen are simply, under the present
certified copies of cornay ma ire Il 6ne
before them have been delivered to them
by the Prothonotary of the Common Pleas.
l might at length state my reasons for this
opinion, but itmay be unnecessary. So sat
Isled am | that this view is correct, that |
holdlt to be the rule that the retUra jul0eS
cannot, as the law now stands, inquire into
the question of fraud, and for the simple
reason that the law provides when and now
that question shall be settled They are only
return judges. Open the door to any exef-
clse OF Judicial functions, and these gentle
men become the Judges of a conte,ted elec-
ton, result so manifestly wrong that we
think that the correctness Of our view
will be admitted y
When the certified copies of COMPANY
returnsy and these alone are presented to the
board Of return judges they must simply o.
! pen them and enumerate them, and having
thus cast up the vote, it must be added to
the votes already heretofore enumerated in
! October last, at the previous meeting of the
/ board; the general result must thus be ascer-
! tanned and certified according to law.
-Uf. Epson asked whether In the Phila-
| delphia case referred TO the Court went be-
! hind the certificate ofthe return judges and
examined the returns made to those judges
-ul. Cessna yes sir, they orGered the
prothonotary by Judgment of the Court to
bring IN the seventy-nine returns which he
had withheld and he did so. They said
that whether regular or irregular those re-
turns must be counted in determining the
pi5n}d Jdctecase. Now gentlemen on thsaues-
ton ofjmiSdicsion | have some more au-
tholities [ read iom IT, s. Digest, vol.
3. p. II sec. 5.
1t is malfeasance if an officer under col
orofhis Office does what the law prohibits. y
\ ministerial officer can only do such acts
rs he is expressly or by necessary implica-
ton authorized to do Eose VS. Dean, 7
Mass. $50.
The gentleman in his argument says, add
the vote ofSomerset County and he will be
content. We do not concede that if his
board had obtained the vote of Somerset
cSuntv, had counted it, that would have
made return. But ifhe will just take the
vote OF Somerset, and add the soldiers vote
Of Bedford, Adams, and Fulton counties to
the home vote we will be content
A few words now upon some of the equi-
ties Of this case aud l will close What is
the gredt object of elections after all? Is it
not chat the will Of the majority should gov
ern? Every decision that have read upon
the question holds most decidedly that il is
the business of every tribunal before whom
these questions arise to find if'possible where |
the Will Of the majority hes When the ma
lority OF votes for any office has been dep0s
tied in the ballot box that gives the candi- |
daje tOr whom they We're cast title TO the /
office, and | say that Court9, Committees, |
and tribunals of all kinds, if they lean at all |
ought to lean strongly IN favor of obeying +
the will of that majority. You could estab /
hsh no more dangerous precedent than YOU /
would do by getting lantern and going a.
round in search OF some invisible technical |
quibble by which the will of the majority of /
the people in this Congressional district shall |
be sci aside even pJ9a,a JcIcte These peo-
pie haze presented themselves before the
proper tribunal, have voted, their votes
have gone into the ballot box and DEFY any
boay in Pennsylvania. here, or anywhere
else, 60 pretend that majority Of sixty eight {
OF these legal voters have not cast their votes
in favor Of my client
/ then appeal to this Committee not