Mr. DAWES. That only shows, as I stated before, that the testimony was so volumine us that my friend could not read it, and so he trusted to the minority report for his facts. We reported on 4 districts, 2 of which we sustain and 2 of which we do not, because there is doubt in the testimony. There is one thing more to which I will ad. vert. The Gentfrom Ohio [Mr. GAB FIELD] says he is prompted to do this because we make this admission: “The committeeare, however, of the opinion that itwns compotent for either oontestantorsitting member to prove the cpsting of legal votes at this poll, even Withouta register. Now, that is precisely what we in the report declared was a properthing for them to do. They did not do it, but afterward the sitting member asked tohave further time for that purpose. In that respect the resolution of the Gentfrom Ohio [Mr. Gaunt 21.0] follows the very course which the sitting member desired and now I wish to call attention to the fact that when the Gentfrom Ohio [Mr. GAR FIELD] adopted the resolution, otTered by my colleague on the committee, [Mr. PAINE] confining the taking of this testimony to the 10th day of May, the sitting member sprang to his feet and son lit to extend the time beyond the 10th day of lay. Let him not be concerned. If the resolution is adopted, and this is recommitted to the committee, he will not be required to be here on the 10th dayof may; he Willnot be required to be here this session ofCongress at all. It is not oesible. There are 4 election cases behin yet to be heard. The testimony cannot be ke t until after the 10th of May and produced ere until the close of the session. It will be January before he would get to the hearing of the case, and then he can take ten days as well at the next session as at this, and it will be the last 2 weeks of this Congress before the report will be made and does the gentleman suppose thatin the last 2 weeks we can spend 4 more days arguing this case?. That is the practical result of the proposition to submit it again to this committee, and that, too, after every opportunity has been afforded that any contestant or sitting member has had in 30 years to bring his case before the committee. There is not on record a case where a party has had a hearing of ten days and has afterward come into the House and said he wanted more time to take testimony. But my friendfrom Ohio [Mr. Srswnm1haa another mode of disposing of this case. Why did not my friend on my right come right out man fully and say we had better confirm the sitting member in his seat than strike this side blow at the report of the committee by recommitting the report, the effect of which can be nothing else than to confirm him in his seat. The practical operation of it, I submit, is nothing else than to do so. But my friend over the way [Mr. SPALDING] says that the method pursued by the committee is not.justifiable to set aside the vote of a recinct which is proved to be illegal and fraudulent, and which he agrees with the committee is so, because we have no right so to override the will of the people in a precinct; and if we may do it. iu one precinct we may do it in 2, and may thus unseat any member. I believe I state it correctly and that is the line of the argument of the Gentfrom Illinois, Mr. hsasswosrn] t was an argument that evinced that be under stood thoroughly the case. It was exactly in the line that I had heard before so long in the committee, that no one who had hear it the 1st time could doubt but what it was an able and thorough argument, made from a complete understanding of the case. But I want to call his attention to the fact that his conversion in the case surpasses that of Saul of Tarsus. For let us remember thQ in the last few moments of the debate in the Voorhees case my friend begged a few minutes of my time in order to make a speech, and he made haste to say that he disagreed with the committee because they did not go far enough. Because the committee set aside a poll and then gave the parties an opportunity to prove the votes, he said that that, in his opinion, was not law. Here the hammer fell.]