The Union flag. [volume] (Jonesborough, Tenn.) 1865-187?, 1869-04-23
SPEECH
SPEECH
OF
Hen. r. R. Butler ON the COTOde.
Foster Contested Election Case.

80 '"N" w w. ~ uldkeb no ulHer'
enee what evidence was in the pigeon.
hole or in the desk of the Clerk Of the
Committee Of Elections. This case
is like all otherS. Wherever there is
fraud and corruption they leave their
tracks behind. The only object Of
the majority of the com mittee in
this oaes is to protect an bonest and
patriotic man against the frand and
corruption of the opposite party in the
twenty first district of Pennsylvania.
The faOts are few and easily COM
pretended, and the dnty OF every
member Of the House is plainly mark.
ed ont and easily to be understood II
they desire to understand the facts and
act accordingly. What did the House
instruct the Committee OF Elections
to do? Was it 80 inquire into all the
facts and circumstances connected
with the caseY No, sir the commit
tee were INSTRUCTED to take up the
Governors proclamation and his sub
segment letter with the accompanying
athdavits and report to the House
who was priNa fdcie entitled to the
seat. They have discharged that du-
ty. They took up the proclamation
Of the Governor; they took up the
letter of the Governor and the aiiedg-
ed afidayits, and the majority of the
committee say, in the language of the
Govsfnor Of PennsylvaniS, that they
indicate the election OF Hon, John
Coyode." What does "primd fdcis "
mean? 1t means Who has got the
best showing at the first blush or at
the first glance. Who has the great
er weight OF evidence or the best
showing in this case? Who has got
any showing except John Covode?
Has Mr.. Foster any showing? Has
he any papers or any evidence of any
character to show to the committee
that he ever received vote in the
twenty first Congressional district of
Pennsylvania? What evidence had
the committee but the proclamation
of the Governor and his letter, to-
gether with tho attidavits that ao-
oompqnied ii! 1t is an Official letter
from The Governor Of the State of
Pennsylvania, properly authenticated
with the seal of the State and signed
by the Secretary Of State.
A distinction is attempted to be
drawn in this case betwesn the proc.
lamation and the letter, distinction
without a difference, such as You and
| have seen attempted on many oc-
oasions. Suppose the Governor of
Pennsylvania had issued second
proclamation and used the identical
language that he nses in tha5 letter
who would have been here TO have
objectedl The Clerk of tho House
would have enrolled Mr. COvode's
name on the list, he would have been
qualified at the meeting of this Con.
gress, and no objection woTld have
been made. But suppose the GoverE-
or of Pennsylvania made mistake;
suppose that he was mistaken as to
his duty? Instead ofa proclamation
be issues a letter, and says substan-
TALLY; "When issued my first proc
lamation, by virtue OF the act of the
General Assembly in such cases made
and provided, there was no evidence
before me that Indicated the election
of either party frop the twenty first
district, but thereafter more evidence
was filed in my Office, more proof was
presented in the shape Of atfidavits
taken according to tho laws of tbs
State by officers authorized by law to
administer oaths, and from that egi-
dencs, on Sic in my office, | issue a letter
instead Of proclamation, believing
that it is the same in substance and
will have tho same effect, direct.
ed to the Clerk of the House OF Rep
resentatives, and from the evidence
now before me | do not say that John
Covode was legally and constitution
ally elected that is question for
the House Of Representatives--the
Constitution gives them the power to
Judge Of that--but say that the evi-
denoe on file in my Office indicates the
election Of Hon. John Covode."
What evidence coutradiets it! What
evidence denies III What isthere TO
rebut itl Has Mr.. Foster presented
any such evidenced Is there any
testimony TO show that he got vote
in the districLl Then, what more can
the committee dol What less can
they do than to say from what was
sent TO them by the House Of Rep
ressntatives that from the ebarsctoI
Of that evidence, John CovOde has
The best showingj that he has The
psimd facie right to q seat upon thi'
floorl II does not prejudice The
right Of the othor party it doe'
not take away from him 9 single
right; Il leaves him whore we fount
him, with al his rights as a contest
ant. Then, II the charge that fraud
were committed is untrae-and they