The Columbian. [volume] (Bloomsburg, Pa.) 1866-1910, 1877-01-26
A DOSE FOR REPUBLICAN BuLLDozERs.

The powers of election boards and return
ing boards being now a matter of dispute
We desire to call the attention of our Radica
friends to the contested election case of Sen.
ator Weaklcy, reported in "a p. F. Smith
page 479. The decision of the Supreme
Court was delivered by Chief Justice Thomp.
son. and is as follows:
(l.l As to the first plea. Tho certificate
therein set forth is in no respect according tC
the Act of Assembly. The act says that when
the return judges shall have met, "they cast
up The several county returns, and make dupli-
cate returns of all the votes given for such OF.
tices, IN said district Senate Congress or As.
semblymcn) and of the name of the person
elected, l." and dispose of the duplicates when
so made out as already stated; and further,
the act provides that 'it shall be the duty of
the return judges in every case to transmit to
each Of the persons elected to serve in Con.
gress, in the Senate aud House of Represent
atNos, certificate of his election within five
days after the making up of such return"
In the certificate referred to, there is no
counting up of the turns and certificate OF
the person elected senator nor any pretence
OF notice to him of his election. On the con-
t'ary, this was refu c !, because the Judges
say. it ''nrpoars that bribery and fraud had
been made Use O' 10 secure the election Of the
candidate having by the county returns ina
jnrity OF votes in the district So far from
this being the certificate required by law, it
was n refusal to certify. The returns were
plain and in eligible, at least nothing to the
contrary is alleged, aud the only duty of the
return Judges wa, to cast them NJ and certify
| for whom the majority had been given. The
c'u''ly returns were' As to them ~, N the PEI :,
Ior''ia"csol tnl' ol'y y'cHhriuNiVe' lhey oo'Hd
not DC aiSftsaraod N the least except per
maps i9r piaia elerica' errors. and could not he
a,,de hey were to be the eyidenee upon
WI M,leH lhe return judges shonid alone act
| nc Juuses certlnc"te ana returns were 10 De
| the priiha iacie c9inmrrlon OF the senator
ahu py Ia" u "ouid s'and until overruled by
| rGguiar ac'lon oi the senate, IN Judging VI
.he qualihcatoni nnder the C9nSt,tution OF
the member holding It, 10 hold that the
ceit,ncate IN question was compliance with
t,le law m !nis respect, would DC to MAINTAIN
the possioiiity OF senator beng received
unuer commission certihed TO have been
s!aiueu py bribery and fraud. ihls would be
slmpy preposierous. shall notice, further
on 1ne grounuless assumption that the return
Juuges nad Jurlsoictlon OF any such question
as the existence @ OF alleged fraud IN The elec-
'ion; we oVerruie this answer or plea also.
| as 10 irIegunrltles, ana the want OF
complinnce WIN the Jaw on part OF the eiec-
tion olicers OF the township or district elec'
e,o,s' an9 .he alegeu naste ana want OF care
on par. oi Tue return Judges OF the county In
eJhssh.oh hiss al TINS lies PACK OF the returns
M'i'.n we na,e Just sai9 were conclusive Oh
lIe Ieluih luuges OF the distfict. From these
,e,Gr''s .nelr uu1H was 70 east up ana certify
lnei' retu,li; ms pla,hiy-expressed du'y
t,eals eic,aueu .ni exercise OF any other du-
y llccIisls,ent WIN IL Efpress'o 1n'"s es'
erct"sio dner'"s. We have never heard it
contended that the authority given to the dis
trlct return Judges TO perform their PLAIN duty
carried Win u general supervisory power to
lp lUuh iuto ail tnat preceded the county returns
ineIS Is ho sucn tnihg IN the law, and 1t
woulG ~ yea 50 thlnS Tor institutions II 1t were
~. ms pea OF answer Is untenable, and Is
o'c5ru'Gu also'
Lo'I ~ .l,s pea lhe respondent alleges Drl-
ue,y a.,u iiauu IN the election as an excuse Tor
U w. ctrtiying az ne was required oy law to DO
we we nope anis Is BOT true: But even II 1t
"e:.' no was ho' .ne agthorly 10 examine IN
10 70 IL vi act upon II. NOR are we, upon whom
.le ::nsmei.eAs r 10 cast responsibility VI IN,
y; aesIIsI.nS Ii,S IT, nhls we nave distinctly SAID
ln ! Hulseman o. hems, 0 Wright 396,and it i
nae never h peen said, we would say It now. 1t
!or tne senate 10 investigate charges OF
sils a ua'tfe' at Inc Iohsti!ution expressly says
so' anu 10 tnaI oody It 1t proper, and the
ohly pace ~ is proper legally TO make such
JJnt,ges. II they prove true, that body Will
so lts uuty Hou9tless, and expel any member
Tp IRON ls nali VINO IS there by such means,
,,;e nc aeheey ior aii TINS Is oy contesting the
riec'.on ere e III .he parry charged Inc law Is am,
PIE lor .hls, aud this is the constitutional
'r ,noue Vi rL rtLearesslng ana punishlng such a
wrong. me respondent could hardly have
dGon,ehp'a.ea dont h & ine conseqnences OF the prece
uen. NE m1Ia set y sustained IN this plea'
or we thlnK ne Would not clam 1t as pro-
tion Of senators % cnnuros. uo ,em iu'uans VI eiec
tives ever made r. sncb tb;.n vara ,oes;ti
to be maintained Tbore s e,J I'LL aI,lppo pons,Gle m
enough. regret tn bsi;evo ou w smna, @.,wass "
in the election and the'ebv nrsran, au, r'auu