Mr. DAWES. I propose to show, without the slightest technicality, and by this man’s own tables, that he was in a minority. Before I come to that, however, let me say that no man can ask us to take these tables, and add up all these votes, and then say that the contestant has a majority over the sitting member, unless we are satisfied that the tables contain all the votes cast. And we cannot be satisfied of that without some evidence. There is not a man living who can say that there is a particle of evidence to show that. And not only that, there is evidence that one of the poll books is gone, and no reason has ever been given for its disappearance. I call the attention of the House to the fact that poll book No. 52, of Indiana county, is put down here in the returns as an entire blank; NO. 51 is here, and No. 53 is here; but there is no return at all of No. 62, either from the prothonotary or the SecyState. The entire poll is gone, and they give no reason for it in this paper; and yet, leaving out this one poll, the contestant claims a majority of 18. But that is not all, Mr. Speaker. I ask you to look at this poll; it foots up, in the absence of one poll book, 1'8 majority for the contestant; but that 18 is made up in this way, the votes in No. 51 and No. 61 in Indiana county, are counted twice. I take it, that however much he may love the soldiers, the soldiers’ very warm hearted friendfrom Pennsylvania [Mr. ltIiLLsu] would not require that we should count their votes twice. No. 61 in Indiana county was the Tyler hospital. There were but 3 votes cast, but they were counted, as you will find on page 1L4, and put do n as cast at the Tyler hospital. The poll b k gives the names of the voters and their residence. Turn now to page 281, and you find there another poll book, all perfect in form, except that the place where the poll was hold is left blank. They asked us not to reject thg poll book because the place was left blank, and insisted that we should count the vote, and we did count it. But when you turn to the poll book you find that the names and the places of residence are the same as those on the poll book on page 144. So that 3 of the 18 votes have been counted twice, and that reduces the alleged majority to 15. And upon pages 81, 83, and 89 there are 3 more that have been counted twice. Their names are James McCrackin of Brush Valley, Isaac Oberdorf of Brush Valley, and Jacob Crist of MountPleasant. Their names are given, their companies are given, and their residences are given; and their votes are counted twice. That takes 3 more from his 18 majority, leaving him but 12. And upop page 84 of the 1stbook there are 31 votes counte for 30, a mistake of 1, redu cing the majority claimed to 11. Then I call the attention of the House to page 81, to what is counted as 13votes for Fuller and 1 for Dawson. It is this: “for senator in the Senate of the State of Pennsylvania, 14 votes, of which Smith Fuller had 13 votes and John L. Dawson had 1 vote.” That is all there is in the return; there is no evidence of anything else. It is a solemn certificate that 14 votes were cast, 13 for Smith Fuller and 1 for Dawson, for senator in the senate of the State of Pennsylvania. And those votes are counted to help make up this majority of 18. Now, I do not know of any informalities that can be Overlooked. It might have been a mistake, but if so it was the easiest thing in the world to take a deposition to show that it was a mistake. But all the evidenee before us is to the effect that the votes thus given were cast for State Senator, and not for member of Congress. By deducting these votes you get a majority of 1 for the sitting member instead of 18 for the contestant. But that is not all. Here is another, pages 232 and 286z company K, 231st regiment, ayette county, 6 votes. The tally paper, the list of votes with the names of the persons who voted at the State election of the qualified voters of Fayette county, State of ennsyl vania, “for members in the HoRep of the U.S., John L. Daw son, 2 votes; Smith Fuller, 8 votes.” That is signed by nobody; it is alittle stri of paper not signed by anybody. And yet these votes are counted to make out this majority of 18 for the contefiant. Now, deducting also those 6 votes, and it puts him in a minority of 7 on his own paper. I will not insult the good sense of the House by arguing that a simple slip of paper with nobody’s name signed to it should not be regarded. I might have made out the aper myself; non-constat but I did make it. I‘here is no evidence in the world whence it came or whither it goes. Now, take McClellan hospital, No. 6, West morelaud county. There is a return just like this last to which I have referred, signed by nobody, simply a piece of paper with a statement upon 1t, such as I might pick up in a dozen places in this House, with no name at tached to it anywhere. Yet that is counted to give 3 morevotes to the contestant, which, being also deducted, puts him in a minority of 10. Then, on go 333. there is another return just exactly fifie these last, with nobody’s name signed to it, without any more authentication than a mere newspaper paragraph, which is included to ive2 more votes to the contestant. to make upiis majority of 18. Now, deduct also those 2 votes, and upon his own paper he is placed in a minority of 12 votes. Then there is Camp Hamilton, page 301, without a particle of testimony, a particle of evidence, with no certificate, with nobody’s name signed to it whatever. That is used to give 1 vote tovmake up the 18 majority claimed by the contestant. Now, deduct that 1 vote also, and instead of the contestant having a majority of 18 votes, he is shown by his own paper to be in a minority of at least 13 votes. here is one aper having ifpon it a statement of 10 votes hr the contestant and 13 for the sitting member; but this paper has no signature attached. So that the same rule would apply to that if the 2 pape rs stand upon an equality. But who reduce; it? The contestant produces it. Yet 0 does not show what, use was ever made of it anywhere; he does not show that it was ever counted any where. Thus, Mr. Speaker, if any member of this House, feeling an anxict lest we should by our action deprive some so dier of his vote, has done me the honor to listen to what I have said, I think he must be convinced of one of 2 things: either I have not stated the facts correctly, or the contestant is 13 votes in the minority by the showing ofhis own paper.