Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1882-11-19

SAOhSO@, mIeS, NOVemDer 1o.-1ne OeC-
retary of State to-day commenced, in accord
snce with law, the canvass of the votes for
members of Congress.
FIRST DISTRICT.
In the First District Muldrow was de-
clared elected, he baving received 1890 votes
and I. &. Lyon 1416 votes.
SECOND DISTRICT.
| When the Second District was taken up
Gen. Chalmers appeared in his own interesi,
and Ell NJ. Watson, of Holly Springs, and
ii. p. Branham. of Oxford, for Manning.
izhen Marshall county was reached, coun-
sci for Manning objected 10 having the same
counted, on the ground las appears in effect
from protest BY the Commissioners OF Elec-
ton accompanying the retuTns) that they
had prepared another and different returns,
bat were afierward, from threats of prosecu-
tion in the Federal Conrt made by the
United States district attorney, deferred
from forwarding them, and made this amend
ed report.
After hearing argument the secretary
counted the votes as returned.
When Tate county was reached the re-
turns gave a detailed tally sheet, which
showed that v. H. Manning received total
OF 1166 voes, and j. r. ChambIess 1872 votes
certificate on the back of the tally sheet
certified that J. R. Chalmers received 1872
votes, and so on, "as appears from the fore
going tally sheet" which they further certify
TO be correct.
Manning's counsel objected TO counting
the Chambless votes for Chalmers. Chal-
mers insisted on having the votes, and asked
TO be heard by the counsel.
A recess was taken that the parties might
prepare for the argument. w. L. Nugent,
of Jackson. appeared for Chalmers. and ad-
diiional counsel in the person of E, d.
Clarke, of Vieksburg, appeared for Manning,
The latter of whom opened the argument,
but before he had proceeded far the sheriff |
appeared and served an order on the Secre- |
tary of state, sued out before the circuit |
judge, on The petition of ,Chal- |
merr, setting forth that he was
elected to Congress, and that the Secretary OF
State refuses to count 1872 votes received by
him, thus defeating him of his election. The |
order iorbids his issuing certificate of cleo
tion to any other person than ]. R. Chal-.
mers, or taking any other steps until further
orders of the court.
Mr.. Clarke concluded his argument, and
was followed by Mr.. Nugent, after which a
recess was taken.
On reassembliug the Secretary of State
announced that he had heard the argument
on both sides, and had arrived at the con-
clusion that his duties are purely minis
terial, and that he could only count the votes
as they appeared in the returns; that he felt |
it his duty 10 count the vote in Tate county
as given in the tally sheet, and refused TO
count the 1872 votes therein for Chalmers, as
claimed by him, but would count the same
for j. r. Chonlbless, and having canvassed
the whole vote he declared Manning elected
from the returns received. According to the
vote as counted, Manning received S749,
Chalmers 8257, Carter 129, Cham6less
1472, Howry L. Under the law of the State
il is the duty of the Secretary of State to
count the votes and declare the result, and
The commission has been issued
by the governor TO Van H Manning. Man
ming was preparing TO contest Chalmers's
seat on the ground that he had secured his
election by the lavish use of Hubbsll's cor
ruPtion fund and the illegal Interference of
United States deputy marshsls in the rural
districts. But by this decision Manning
will be the contestee instead of the contest
ant, if contest should be made. 1t Is the
opinion, of the bar here, aud other eminent
visiting lawyers, that the decision of the Sec-
r,tsry of State is correct, and that the cir
III judges interference was without author
ty of law.