Lancaster daily intelligencer. [volume] (Lancaster, Pa.) 1864-1928, 1882-10-30
CONGh hESSMAN-AT
Col. McSlIchael Objects to His Name G0ins;
ON Boss County Tickets.

Col. McSlIchael Objects to His Name Goiu;;
on Boss County Tickets.
The prOpricty of the decision of tho
chairman of the state committee of the
Republican, Democratic, Independent Re
publican and National Grcenback- Labor
parties, that tho names of tho candidates
for congressman large should te placed
UPON tho county ticket, was discussed
Saturday in the old quarter sessions court
in Philadelphia before Judges Hare
and ElcOck. Tho decision of tho chair
man was based mainly upon tho act
of March 80, 1866 which directs
that " one ticket shall embrace tho names
of all judges of courts voted for, and to be
labeled outside Judiciary one ticket
shall embrace the names of all state Off
cers voted for and DO labeled State; one
ticket shall embrace the names of all
county officers voted for, including Office
of senator, member or members of As
sembly if voted for, and members Of Con-
gress if voted for, and he labeled 'COun-
ty.';' This decision was reached
on the 18th of tho present month,
and upon hearing of it a few days later,
Colonel VIM. McMichael, tho Independent
candidate, wrote tOI D. Mckee, the chair.
man Of the Independent Republican state
committee, objecting to the printing of his
name upon the county tickets, as many of
them were Objectionable, aud he would
become ian indorser of boss county
tickets" Following this letter Mr.. Mckee,
with the approval Of his advisory commit
tee, sought the opinion of counsel upon
the subject, and secured an opinion from
Messrs. George w. Biddle, George Lear
and Il. G. McNlurtie. stating that "with
reference to tho question of what is the
proper ticket ON which cOngressman-at.
large is to be voted for, VIC are of the opin-
ion that tho ticket labeled county is the
ticket ON which the name of congressman
at large to be voted for should De placed.
Still dissatisfied with this Colonel Nc
Michael retained counsel, and notices hav-
ing been served upon Chairman Cooper.
Hensel and Mckee, he applied 10 the
court for a judicial decision of the ques.
ton.
Mr.. Francis A. Lewis, Colonel McMich-
ael's counsel, argued that the act of 1856
was modified, and to a certain extent re-
pealed, by acts of 1869 and 1874, and that
as the candidates for coagressman-at
large were to be voted for by all the voters
of the state, the Office was quasi state
office, and the names should be printed
upon tho state ticket. This view was op-
posed by George w. Biddle, esq, repre-
senting Mr.. Mckee, and Colonel VIM. B.
Mann, representing the regular Republi
can committee.
John Cadwallader, who was present with
Chairman Harrity Of tho city committee,
stated to the court that in the absence of
Chairman Hensel he was authorized to
state that the Democratic committee was
satisfied of the correctness of the decision
reached at tho conference of chairmen and
took no interest in the present proceed
ings.
Upon the conclusion of the argument
Judge Hare said that tho court had no
jurisdiction to consider the matter in the
strict technical sense of the word, but that
they were willing to express an opinion
which might serve as a guide but would
still leave all parties free to follow their
own view of the law and could not be
ouoted hereafter as a precedent or author
ity. Tie thought that the act of 1866 was
still in force, and that the phrase I" mem
Der of Congress was broad enough to
cover any member Of Congress, whether
eIocsed in the usual way or at large. He