Mr. UPSON: I will notice that when I come to investieate that question, but at present that question does not arise; when it does, I think can satisfy the gentleman that no number of soldiers votes t iat could legally have been counted would have altered the result. We have shown that the vote of Somerset county was not in and the reason why it was not in. Wethen showthat the voteof somerset county would not have changed the result, and therefore that there is no excuse for going behind the legal returns. But suppose we waive that for the time being and resort to what comes next in order under the law of Pennsylvania, namely, the official returns of the county boards, and what do these show?I may say here in relation to these returns from the county boards, that those from the 3 counties of Franklin, Fulton and Somerset are admitted by both parties to he signed by all the return judges, audito be genuine returns. No question is raised about them. Then from dams and Bedford counties there are what are called majority and minority returns, and those were both submitted and referred to the committee and here I wish to allude to a point which my friendfrom Wisconsin [Mr. Puss] noticed in the o ening ofiny argument. In the minority report the objection is made that the majority returns are admitted only in connection with the minority returns. The one is admitted and the other is admitted. I do not question anything in relation to that point, they are both admitted for the purpose o investigation. But the question at once comes up in rerd to their legalit and effect. The identify of the papers is admitted by both parties, undisputed y either of them. hen we consider the majority and minority returns the westion comes up which is the legal paper? e will see by reerence to the Opinion of the AttyGen that the majority return is the legal return, and the minority return has no legal effect whatever. That opinion of the AttyGen is quoted in the report of the majority of the committee on page 5 of their report. There was a judicial district embraced within this congressional district which district was composed of the counties of Itranklin, Bedford, Somerset, and Fulton. I will here read from the report of the majority of the ComElections, as follows: “But it is claimed on the lpart of Mr. Koorits that all the return judges in one county mustHI" and certify the returns of that county; that thojudges must act as a unit, and that if theydo not so unite in signing the certificate. the certificate is void and the refurn invalid. A similar position wastakcnbyaDem ocrntic district board of return judgesof the counties of Franklin, Fulton, Bedford, and Somerset. comosini: the 16th judicialdistrict of Icnpsylvania, in regard to a return of soldiers votes for iuv ire, cer tified by the majority of the county return judges of Beilford. the sameas in this one. (Paper9 and said district return judges assumed to r ect the return nfsoldiers votes for iudgc, soccrtifie by. the majority of the return judgas of Redford county. becai ise said return was not signed by the remaining 9 return judges of said county and in this wa ever came the majorit for King. the Union candiatefor judge and gave the certicatoto Kimmell, the Democratic candidate, butincluded in their return astutement of this soldiersvote, and the fact of their action in regardto it.” and the Governor referred the matterto the AttyGen of the Commonwealth, because if these votes Were rejected one man was elected, if they were counted another man was elected aliuldrjceA. INE. I would not interrupt the gentleman, as his time is passing away, but I desire to ask him a question. My question is this: whether it is not true that in the case of the judicial election, of which he is now speaking, it does not appear from the papers which he cites that any of the judges who did not sign the may orit vreport were present. The language of the law of Pennsylvania is that the report shall be signed by all the judges present; and from the papers in the case of the judicial election it does not appear that the judges who did not sign the report were present.