Mr. DAWES. Now, what does he say in that brief? He says that in the 21st ward, 13th district, the absence of canvassers pending the canvass (B., 294) exosed the canvass to peril from outsiders, an that the district vote Dodge, 894; Brooks, 182; Barr, 27, furnishing reasons, if an district is excluded from the count, the est reason for excluding this. I am aware that the testimony which has been taken is in the book; but Irepeat that neither party asked the committee to look at this. The sitting member described 4 contested districts. but he only referredto this, he said, for the purpose of elucidation. If I have time I will refer to the testimony in this district. I have alread stated the committee have not held any illegalltyin a district otherwise honest was any reason to set it aside. I have repeated it over and over again. Allow me to say that the committee based their conclusions not upon the fact that the board Was ill all constituted but upon these naked frauds which they after vLard found. I want the House to understand t at., It was charged in this district, after the can Vnssers took possession of the boxes, the left the canvass and went awayto get somere reshment for 20 minutes. It is now claimed because they did that we must reject this ifwe reject the other. How is this charge supported 7 It is supported, if at all, by 3 witnesses, 3 only. 2 of them swear only 2 of the canvassers went away, 2 on], naming them. One of them swears he a his asso ciates stood right in sight of the boxes while they were one and that they could see every thing that appened, and that the boxes were not touched. There is some contradiction of the testimony here. One witness contradicts another witness. One swears one way and another contradicts him. One witness, a senator elect, or a senator occuping his seat at the time, of the State of New kork, Senator connolly, I think, swears that be was where he could look right on the boxes allthe time until these men came back. Another witness contradicts him. One swears that 3 canvassers went away and left the boxes in charge of the clerk and a police officer. He swears before he went away that they canvassed the Congress box. Now, Mr. Speaker, without any evidence that the box was touched at all; with the evidence of Senator Connolly, who swears that he was where he could see the box, and that during the whole time he saw nothing done to it; with the evidence of another, who said they can vassed the Congress box before they wentaway, and with the fact if there had been no canvass there could have been some discrepancy proved, we are asked why we ought not to reject this box because these 2 or 3 men went away and left it. I and we are asked to do this at this late day. insist that we would have weighed the testimony if we had been asked in the committee to have done so. Now, what is the duty of CongressL I do not ask them to take the report of the committee blindly and without any question. I do not ask them to support its conclusion if from the testimon they are satisfied it is not a just one. But insist it is the duty of congress to do one of 2 thin 3, either to supportthe conclusion at which i the committee us arrived or to show from the testimony why it should herejected. I do not claim for the committee the right to have its report ado )ted without examination. Every member of the House, as well as every member of the committee, is responsible for the vote which he may cast; but the committee have a double responsibility, they have to be responsible that they do not misguide the House. Now, here is a case admitted by eve body to be difficult to secure possession of all the facts involved. I do not ask on that account the report of the committee shall be adopted without question. The testimony was so volumine us that it could not be expected that the members of the House could have carefully examined it. I do not ask that the report shall be adopted without question, but I do ask for it fair and candid treatment. Now, the Gentfrom Ohio [Mr. Gm rmm] came into the House and otfered a series of resolutions to recommit this case to the committee for further investigation. Upon what did. he base his resolutions? This is the language of the Gentfrom Ohio: "Now, one thing more: this whole case practically tn s on the settlement of the question in relation to the 15th district of the 18 thward: for if the report of the majority be acceptedin all other particulars and rejectedin respectto that district, it still does not unseatMr. Brooks. There are so many remarkablecollisionsbetweenI!!!“reportsof the majority and themine rilythatI am unwilling to act until some of them are cleared away.” Now, I submit, Mr. Speaker, in all kindness to my friendfrom Ohio, if that is fair. Every body knows that this is a volumine us and complicated case, and the gentleman has not had time to examine it and study it and understand the testimony and yethe is unwilling to take the report of the committee. Why? Not because he knows that there is anything in it wrong; not because he has found in it any thin that is not corroborated by the testimony; but ecanse the minority of the committee do not agree with the