[The refusal of the Executive of a State to grant a certificate of election does not prejudice the right of one who may be entitled to a seat. The returns of votes, though not made within the time required by the State law, are not on that account to be rejected, provided the opportunity has been allowed the State authorities to act upon them. But if they are substantially defective, unaccompanied by a list of the voters, &c. they ought to be rejected.] In the district composed of the counties of Bucks, North- John Richards, ampton, and Montgomery, in the State of Pennsylvania, of Pennsylva James Morris and John Richards were candidates for elec- nia, petitioner. tion; but the circumstances of the election were such as to make it doubtful to the mind of the Governor of the State whether either was duly elected, and he appears, therefore, to have declined deciding upon the legality of the said election. Before the meeting of Congress Mr. Morris died, and on the 10th December, 1795, the other candidate made his memorial to the House, setting forth the facts, and making his claim to a seat. The report of the committee is as follows, to wit: "It appears to your committee that an election was held First report of on the second Tuesday in October, in the year 1794, in the committee. counties of Bucks, Northampton, and Montgomery, in the State of Pennsylvania, composing one entire district, for the purpose of electing a member to this House. "That the judges of election met at the place directed by law, on the 15th day of November, in the same year, for the purpose of estimating the votes and making their return. That, upon an estimate of all the returns that had been made within the time prescribed by law, it appeared that James Morris had the highest number of votes, viz. 1,648., "That one of the army returns, viz. of the militia of Mont- State of the gomery county, was laid before the said judges on the said votes returned. 15th of November, and by them rejected, because it had been delivered to the prothonotary of the county after the 1796. 1st SESSION. 10th day of the same month, the time prescribed by law for 4th CONGRESS, making such returns; by which return, John Richards had 156 votes, and James Morris 58; which number, together Report of the with those on the general return, made the votes in favor of John Richards 1,791. committee. "That on the said 15th day of November no returns had been made of the votes given in by the Bucks county militia; returns have been since received, by which it appears that James Morris had 91 votes. "Whereupon your committee are of opinion that the army returns, which were not made within the time prescribed by law, ought to be rejected, and that James Morris was duly elected; but by reason of his death, since the holding of the said election, the seat is become vacant, and recommend the following resolutions: "Resolved, That the seat of the said James Morris, as a member of this House, is, and the same is declared to be, vacant. "Resolved, That the Speaker transmit a copy of the preceding resolution to the Executive of the State of Pennsylvania, to the end that the said Executive may issue writs of election to fill the said vacancy." Votes in favor of James Morris on the general return 1,648 Do 58 Rejected Votes in favor of John Richards on the general return 1,635 156 1,791 Debate on the committee's first report. When this report was made, a desultory debate occurred thereon, of which the following is a brief summary: Mr. SITGREAVES moved that the report of the Committee of Elections should be read a second time. This being done, the member stated that Mr. Richards had gone back to the country under an idea of acquiescing in the report. Upon this ground, he moved that the report should be approved of by the House. Mr. HEISTER stated that he had seen a letter to Mr. Richards, informing him of sickness in his family, and that was the only cause of his immediate return to the country, as he had no design of submitting tacitly to the report. Mr. VENABLE entered into a detail of the circumstances attending this election. He recommends that the House should avoid precipitation. He said that the committee, in their report, had not completely decided the business. Mr. KITTERA likewise entered into a minute discussion of the circumstances attending the election. 1796. 4th CONGRESS, 1st SESSION. Debate on the first report. Mr. SITGREAVES explained that he had proposed to the committee's House to take up the report of the committee, under an impression that Mr. Richards, by leaving town, was satisfied and willing to submit to it. He withdrew his motion. Mr. VENABLE was proceeding to the merits of the case, when he was reminded by the Speaker that there was no question before the House. Mr. GALLATIN then moved that the report should be recommitted to the select committee, for which he gave va rious reasons. Mr. SITGREAVES seconded the motion. He observed Mr. HARPER was for the recommitment. that the arguments of Mr. Gallatin had been adopted and acted upon by the committee. The report was, on motion, read a second time. The cause of this contested election appears to have been chiefly the absence of a great number of electors in this district of Pennsylvania upon the Western expedition. They were, as the reader knows, authorized, by a particular law to that effect, to vote for a Representative in Congress, provided that the returns were made within a specified, legal time. The votes returned, within that time, for the deceased, Mr. Morris, were 1,648, and those for Mr. Richards, 1,635: this gave to the former a majority of 13. Mr. SITGREAVES understood the complaint of Mr. Richards to be, that the unsound votes objected to were comprehended in the preceding numbers; whereas Mr. SITGREAVES himself, a member from the same district, and who, being on the spot at the time of the dispute, could speak with accuracy, knew that the fact was otherwise. Mr. SWIFT said that, as the gentleman who was last up, spoke from personal knowledge, he supposed, of course, that his assertion was true; but Mr. Richards himself had said to the committee that all the unsound votes had been returned after the time prescribed by law. Perhaps he had misunderstood himself; but Mr. SWIFT thought a recommitment necessary, for the sake of explanation. The foregoing report was, on motion, Ordered to be recommitted to the same committee, without any specific instructions; and, on the 13th January, 1796, they made a further report, as follows: "It appears to your committee that an election was held Second report on the second Tuesday in October, 1794, in the counties of of committee. Bucks, Northampton, and Montgomery, in the State of Pennsylvania, for the purpose of electing a member to this House; that, the same day, an election was held by the 1796. militia that had marched from the beforementioned counties, 4th CONGRESS, on the Western expedition, for the same purpose. 1st SESSION. the mode of vates. "That the law of Pennsylvania, made for that special case, Pennsylvania directs that the county judges of elections, instead of meetlaw directing ing on the 3d Tuesday of October, as formerly, should meet canvassing the on the 10th day of November; that the army election returns should be sent, by the said 10th of November, to the prothonotaries of the respective counties, and that the prothonotaries should, on that day, deliver them over to the county judges, to enable them to make their returns; that the district judges should meet on the 15th day of November, to examine the county returns, to make an estimate of all the votes, and to return the person having the highest number, the Representative for the district. "That the county judges, as the law directs, met on the 10th day of November, at which time no army returns had been received, except from the militia of Northampton; that, after the 10th, and before the 15th, the returns of the county of Montgomery were received by the prothonotary Montgomery of that county, and delivered over to some of the county judges, two of whom made up a return, and certified it on the 14th to be a true return of the votes that had come to their hands. Returns of county. Return of "That, on the 15th, the judges of the district met according to law, at which time were laid before them the last mentioned return, together with the returns of the elections held in the counties respectively, and the return of the militia of Northampton: upon which the judges reported, that, by the general return of the county elections, together with the return of the Northampton militia, James Morris had the highest number of votes, to wit, sixteen hundred and forty-eight. That, by the Montgomery army return, which had been put into their hands in the manner before stated, it appeared that John Richards had one hundred and fifty-six votes, and James Morris fifty-eight; .which number, together with all the votes in favor of John Richards on the other returns, amounted to seventeen hundred and ninety-one, and in favor of James Morris to seventeen hundred and six, and that no returns had at that time come to hand from the Bucks county militia. "That, after the beforementioned report was made to Bucks county. the Governor of Pennsylvania, to wit, on the 18th day of January, 1795, certain papers were lodged with the Secretary of State, purporting to be a regimental return, made by Lieut. Col. James Hanna, of the Bucks county militia, and sundry tally papers, unaccompanied by any list of the persons' names who had voted at the said election, or any certificate of its having been examined by the county judges; on which return it is stated that James Morris had ninetyone votes; whereupon, the petitioner states, 1st SESSION. "1st. That he is entitled to a seat in this House, because, 1796.' upon an estimate of all the votes that appeared by the re4th CONGRESS, turns that were produced before the district judges on the 15th day of November, including the return of the Montgomery militia, which was defective in form only, and not petitioner's in substance, he will be found to have the highest number claim to a seat. of votes, to wit, seventeen hundred and ninety-one, and James Morris seventeen hundred and six. "2dly. That if both the army returns for the counties of Montgomery and Bucks are rejected, by deducting from the army returns of Northampton sixteen votes, which were given by persons unqualified to vote, and two votes for so many given by proxy, he would still have the highest number, to wit, sixteen hundred and thirty-five, and James Morris sixteen hundred and thirty; and "3dly. By admitting both the returns of Bucks and Montgomery counties, and rejecting the number of votes given for James Morris by persons unqualified to vote, and the two given by proxy on the Northampton return, he would then also have the highest number, to wit, seventeen hundred and ninety-one, and James Morris seventeen hundred and seventy-nine. "Upon which statement, and the evidence produced in support thereof by the petitioner, your committee are of opinion, Ground of the ed to be receiv "1st. That the Montgomery return ought to have been Montgomery received by the district judges, and estimated with the other return directreturns, it having come to the hands of the county judges, ed. and having been acted on by them before the 15th day of November, the time prescribed for the district judges to meet.* "2dly. That the Bucks county return ought to be reject- That of Bucks ed as being substantially defective, having never been ex- ed, being subcounty rejectamined by the county judges, and being unaccompanied by stantially defeca list of the names of the persons who voted; and tive. proxy, to be "3dly. That sixteen votes were given at the election Votes by perheld by the Northampton militia, for James Morris, by per- sons not quali fied, and by sons who do not appear to stand on the tax lists of that county, and who are not within the description of such electors' rejected. sons as are permitted to vote by law without being on the tax lists; also, that two votes were given by proxy. "Your committee therefore recommend the following resolution: "Resolved, That John Richards is duly elected as one of the Representatives for the district composed of the counties of Bucks, Northampton, and Montgomery, in the State of Pennsylvania, and that the said John Richards be permitted to take his seat in this House." ⚫See Spaulding us. Mead, 9th Congress, where the returns were admitted, though not made agreeably to the State law; also Mallary vs. Merrill. |