Newspaper Page Text
BY MEYERS & MENGEL.
TERMS OF PUBLICATION. TUB BEDFORD GAZETTE is published every Fri day morning by MEYERS A MUSSEL, at $2.00 per annum, i f paid strictly in advance ; $2.50 if paid within six months; $3.00 if not paid within six months. AH subscription accounts MUST he settled annually. No paper will be sent out of the State unless paid for IN ADVANCE, and all such uhscriptions will invariably be discontinued at the expiration of the time for which they are aid. All ADVERTISEMENTS for a less term than three months TEN CENTS per line for each in sertion. Special notices one-half additional All resolutions of Associations; communications of limited or individual interest, and notices of mar riages and deaths exceeding five line?, ten cents per line. Editorial notices fifteen cents per line. AH legal Notices of every kind, and Orphans' Court and Judicial Sales, are required by hue I be published in both papers published in this place [ All advertising due after first insertion. A liberal discount is made to persons advertising by the quarter, half year, or year, as follows: " 3 months, 6 months. 1 year. ♦One square - - - $4 50 $6 00 $lO 00 Two squares - 000 0 Oil 16 00 Three squares - - - 800 12 00 2U 00 quarter column - - II 00 20 00 35 Of l Half column - - - 18 oO 25 00 45 00 One column - - - - 30 00 4 5 00 80 00 ♦One square to occupy one inch of space JOB PRINTING, of every kind, done with neatness and dispatch. THE G AZETTE OFFICE has just been refitted with a Power Press and new type, and everything 4n the Printing line can l>e execu ted in the most artistic manner and at the lowest rates —TERMS 6ASH. I letters should be addressd to MEYERS A MENGEL, Publishers. i 1 tintino. MM 11 £ BEDFOBD GAZETTE POWER PRESS I' ILI XTI N O EST A BLISIIME NT, BEDFORD, PA. MEYERS & MENGEL PROPRIETORS. Having recently made additional im provements t<" our office, we are pre quired to exeeute all orders for PLAIN AND FANCY J O Ii P HINTING-, With dispatch and in the most S UPERIO R ST YL E. CIRCULARS, LETTER HEADS, HILL HEADS, CHECKS, CERTIFICATES, FLANKS, DEEDS, REGISTERS, RE CEIPTS, CARDS, HEADINGS, ENVEL OPES, SIIOWFILLS, HANDBILLS, IN VITATIONS, LABELS,be. sc. Our facilities for printing FOSTERS, PROGRAMMES, Ac., FOR VON C E RTS AND E XII IB ITIuNS, ARE UNSURPASSED. "PUBLIC SALE" BILLS Printed at -short notice. We can insure complete satisfaction as to time and price rjpHE INQUIRER BOOKS T O R E, opposite the Mengel House, BEDFORD, PA The proprietor takes pleasure in offering to the public the following articles belonging to the Book Business, at CITY RETAIL PRICES : M ISC ELLA NE( >US lit >OKS. N O V E L S. BIBLES, HYMN BOOKS, AC.: Large Family Bibles, Small Bibles. .Medium Bibles, Lutheran liyran Books, Methodist Hymn Books, Smith's Dictionary of the Bible. History of the Books of the Bible, Pilgrim's Progress, Ac., Ac., Ae. Episcopal Prayer Books, Presbyterian Hymn Books, SCHOOL BOOKS. TOY BOOKS. STATIONERY, Congress, Legal, Record. Foolscap, Letter, Congress Letter, Sermon, Commercial Note, Ladies' Gilt. Ladies' Octavo, Mourning, French Note. Bath Post, Damask Laid Note, Cream Laid Note, Envelopes, Ac. WALL PAPER. Several Hundred Difierent Figures, the Largest lot ever brought to Bedford county, for sale at prices CHEAPER THAN EVER SOLD in Bedford. BLANK BOOKS. Day Books, Ledgers, Account Books, Cash Books. Pocket Ledgers, Time Books, Tuck Memorandums, Pass Books, Money Books, Pocket Books, Biank Judgment Notes, drafts, receipts, Ac INKS AND INKSTANDS. Esrometer Inkstands, Gutta Peroba. Cocoa, and Morocco Spring Pocket Inkstands, Glass and Ordinary Stands for Sehools, Flat Glass Ink Wells and Rack, Arnold's Writing Fluids, Hover's Inks, Carmine Inks. Purple Inks, Charlton's Inks, Eukolon for pasting, Ac. PENS AND PENCILS. Gillot's, Cohen's, Hollowbush A Carey's, Pay son. Dunton. and Seribner's Pens, Clark 's Indellible, Faber's Tablet, Cohen's Eagle, Office, Faber's Guttknecht's, Carpenter's Pencils. PERIODICALS. Atlantic Mon.hly, Harper's Magazine, Madame Demirest's Mirror of Fashions, Klectio Maaazine. Godcy's Lady's Book, Galaxy, Lady s Friend, Latiies" Repository, Oar Young Folks, Nick Nax. Yankee Notions, Budget of Fun, Jolly Joker. Phunny Phellow, Lippineott - Magazine, Riverside Magazine, Wavcrly Magazine, Bailou's Magazine, Gardner's Monthly. Harper's Weekly, Frank Leslie's Illustrated, Chimney Corner, New York Ledger. New York Weekly, Harper's Bazar, Every Saturday, Living Age, Putnam's Monthly Magazine, Arthur's Home Magazine. Oliver Optic's Boys and Girl's Magazine Ac. : Constantly on hand to accomodate those who want j to purchase living reading matttcr. Only a part of Oie vast number of articles per- , taining to the Book and Stationery business, , which we are prepared to sell cheaper than the ] cheapest, are above enumerated Give us a call I ♦ We buy and sell for CASH, and by this arrange- 1 uient we expect to sell as cheap as goods of this ; class are sold anywhere jan2V,'yl Ytoofland's ifohimn. you ALL lIAVR HEARD OT HOOFLAND'S GERMAN BITTERS, AND HOMELAND'S GERMAN TONIC. Prepared by Dr. C. M. Jackson, Philadelphia. Their introduction into this country from Ger many occurred in 1825. THEY CURED YOUR FATHERS AND MOTHERS, And will cure you and your children. They are entirely different from w the many preparations now in the country cal |— I led Bitters or Tonics. They tire no tavern E X preparation, or any thing like one ; but good, honest, reliable rnodi cines. They arc The greatest known remedies for Liver Complaint, DYSPEPSIA, Nervous Debility, JAUNDITE, Diseases of the Kidneys, ERUPTIONS OF THE SKIN, and all Diseases arising from a Disordered Liver, stomach, or IMPURITY OF THE FLOOD. Constipation, Flatulence, Inward Piles, Fullnes of Blood to the Head, Acidity of the Stomach, Nausea, Heartburn, Disgust for Food, Full ness or Weight in the Stomach, Sour Eruc tations, Sinking or Fluttering at the Pit of the Stomach, Swimming of the Head. Hurried or Difficult Breathing, Fluttering at the Heart, Choking or Suffocating Sersa fl ft tions when in a Lying Posture. Dimness of * —" Vision, Dots or Webs before the sight, Dull Pain in the Head, Defi ciency of Perspiration, Yellowness of the Skin and Eyes, Pain in the Side, Back, Chest, Limbs, etc.. Sudden Flushes of Heat, Burning in the Flesh. Constant Imagi nings of Evil and Great Depression of Spirits. All these indicate diseases of the Liver or Di gestive Organs, combined with, impure blood. HOOFLAND'S GEKMAN BITTERS is entirely vegetable and contains no liquor. It is a compound of Fluid Extracts. The Roots, Herbs, and Barks from which these extracts are made, are gathered in Germany. All the medi cinal virtueus are ex . tracted from them by a scientific Chemist, fl ft These extracts are then forwarded to this V-W country to be used ex pressly for the manufacture of these Bitters. There is no alcoholic substance of any kind used in compounding the Bitters, hence it is the only Bitters that can be used in CBSOS where alcoholic stimulants arc not advisable. HOOFLAND'S GERMAN TONIC is a combination of all tho ingredient? of tho Bit ters. with PURE Santa Cruz Ruin. Orange, etc. It is used for the same diseases as the Bitters, in case where some pure alcoholic stimulus is required. You will bear in mind that these remedies are en tirely different from any others advertised for the cure of the diseases named, these being scientific preparations of medicinal extracts, while the oth ers are mere decoctions of rum in some form. The TONIC is decidedly one of the most pleasant and agreeable remedies ever offered to the public. Its taste is exquisite. It is a pleasure to take it, while its lifs-giving, exhilarating, and medicinal quali ties have caused it to be known as the greatest of all tODics. DEBILITY. There is no medicine equal to HooCand's Ger man Bitters or Tonic -m in cases of Debility. They impart a tone |q and vigor to the whole system, strengthen -L the appetite, cause an enjoyment of the food, enable the stomach to di gest it, purify the blood, give a good, sound, healthy complexion, eradicate the yellow tinge from the eye, impart a bloom to the cheeks, and change the patient from a short-breathed, emaci ated, weak, and nervous invalid, to a full-faced, stout, and vigorous person. Weak and Delicate Children are made strong by using the Bitters or Tonic. In fact, they are Family Medicines. They can be administered with perfect safety to a child three months old, the most delicate female, or a man of ninety. These remedies are the best Blood Purifiers ever known and will cure all diseases resulting from bad blood. Keep y >ur blood pure ; keep your Liver in order, m keep your digestive organs in a sound, I healthy condition, by the use of these reme E.J dies, and no diseases will ever assail you The best men in the country recommend them. If years of honest reputation go for anything, you must try these preparations. FROM HON.- GEO. W. WOODWARD. Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Pennsylva nia. PHILADELPHIA March 18, 1867. I find that "Iloofland's German Bitters" is not an intoxicating beverage, but is a good tonic, use ful in disorders of the digestive organs, and of great benefit in cases of debility and want of "ner vous action in the system. Yours Truly, GEO. W. WOODWARD. FROM HON. JAMES TAOMPSON. Judge of the Supreme Conrt of Pennsylvania. PHILADELPHIA, April 28, 1866. I consider "Hooftand's German Bitters'' a valua ble medicine in ease . of attacks of Indiges tion or Dyspepsia. I \ can certify this from my experience of it. J-\- Yours, with respect, JAMES THOMPSON i FROM REV. JOSEPH H. KENNARD, D. D., | Pastor of the Tenth Baptist Church, Philadelphia. Du. JACKSON— DEAR SIR: —I have been fre -1 quently requested to connect my name with rec ommendations of different kinds of medicines, but regarding the piactice as out of ray appropriate sphere, I have in all cases declined, but with a clear proof in various instances, and particnlarlv in my own family, ol the usefulness of Dr. Hoof land s German Bitters, I depart for once from my usual course, to express u.y full conviction that for general debility of the system, and es pecially for Liver Com •-r- plaint, it is a safe and valuable prepara tion. In some cases it may fail ; but usual i" ly, I doubt not, it will be very beneficial to those who suffer from the above causes. Yours, very respectfully, J II KENNARD, Eigth, below CoatcsStreet. CAUTION. Iloofland's German Remedies are counterfeited. The Genuine have the signature of C. M. JACK SON on the front of the outside wrapper of each bottle, and tho name of the article blown in each bottle. All others are counterfeit. Price of the Bitters, $1 per bottle; Or, a half dozen for $5. Price of the Tonic, $1 50 per bottle; Or, a half dozen for $7 50. The tonic is put up in quart bottles. Recollect that it is Dr. Iloofland's German Remedies that are so universally used and so highly recommended and do not allow the Druggist to induce I lyou to take anything else that he may sayJL'U just as good, be cause he makes a larger profit on it Those Reme dies will be sent by express to any locality upon application to the PRINCIPAL OFFICE, At the German Medicine Store. No. 631 ARCJI STREET, Philadelphia. CHAS. M. EVANS, PROPRIETOR. Firmerly C M JACKSON A Co. These Remedies are for sale by Druggists, Store keepers and Medicine Dealers everywhere. Do not forget to examine the articlefypu buy in order to ge.t the genuine. iaay2l>'6Syl THE REGISTRY LAW. It is Declared Unconstitutional; Injunction Awarded-Jns tice Sharswood's Opin ion in Full On Saturday, in the Nisi I'rius, Jus tice Sharswood delivered an opinion in the case of Patterson and others against Barlow and others, involving the con stitutionality of the Registry Law. It will be seen that the law is declared unconstitutional and the reasons given for this decision are presented forcibly, and in language not to be misunder stood. The following is the opinion in full: Sharswood, J.—This hill alleges that the act of Assembly, approved April 27' 1809, entitled "An act further sup plemental to the act relative to the e lections of this Commonwealth" is un constitutional, and, therefore, void. If this is so, then previous decisions of the Supreme Court, the authority of which is binding upon me, have set tled that the execution of it may and ought to be prevented by injunction. Moss vs. Reading, 9 Harris, 188 ; Sharp less vs. The Mayor, 18, 417 ; Mott vs. Pennsylvania Railroad Company, 6 Casey, It; Ewing vs. Thompson, 7 Wright, 37o; Kerr vs.Trego, 11 Wright, 292; Page vs. Allen et. al., S. C., July 2, ISGB. Althou 'h sitting as a single Judge at Nisi Prius, I am undoubtedly hound to act according to my own con victions under my oath to support the Constitution ; yet upon a (question of this character and magnitude, I would hesitate long before arresting the exe cution ot an act of the legislature, if my decision could not be immediately brought before the Supreme Court by an appeal. In order "that the general great and essential principles of liberty and free government may be recognized and un alterably established" the people of this Commonwealth, in the fifth section of the ninth article of the Constitution, have declared "that elections shall tie free and equal." To make it perfectly clear that this and the other provisions of that article —headed Declaration of Rights—were not intended as directory merely, but that they were to be ap plied and enforced by appropriate sanc tions and remedies, they emphatically and solemnly add : "To guard against transgressions of the high powers, which we have delegated, we declare that everything in this article is ex cepted out of the general powers of government, and shall forever remain inviolate." it follows as a necessary consequence that any legislative act which destroys or impairs either the freedom or tlie equality of elections is null and void. Tnese words in the Declaration of Rights have certainly some meaning. They are no brutem fulmen. They were intended to prevent wrong or wrongs, which might be attempted un der the forms of law. They were use less else. It is the manifest duty of the judicial power so to construe them as to give them value and effect as an ex pression of the will of the people, made known in the highest exercise of their sovereignty, and paramount, therefore, to an£ act or resolution of ttie Legisla ture, or any other department of the government. I propose to consider what was meant both by the freedom and the equality of elections, and then apply the declara tion of the Constitution as thus inter preted to the act of Assembly, the va lidity of which is now brought in ques tion. By declaring that elections shall he equal, 1 think that it was evidently in tended to provide that the regulations for conducting them should be uni form and that no distinctions, especial ly as to the evidence required to prove the elective franchise, should ever lie made between one class of citizens and another—between those residing in one jilace and those resi dug in another. If equality of election does not mean this, it means nothing. The Constitution, in section 1 of ar ticle 111, has defined with great accura cy those" who shall enjoy the rights of electors. This definition of the elec tive franchise the legislature can neith er enlarge nor abridge. Subject to this necessary limitation, they doubtless have the power to prescribe how the tribunals shall be constituted and chos en, who shall receive and count the votes, and, of course, decide who are and who are not electors; the manner in which, and the officers by whom persons may be qualified by the assess ment and payment of a tax, and the evidence required of those who offer to vote to prove their qualifications. In all these respects, however, as it seems to me, in order that elections shall lie equal, the regulations on this subject must be uniform throughout the Commonwealtn. If the legislature should enact different rules as to differ ent classes of persons claiming to vote, no one, I apprehend, would venture to contend that such elections were equal, or such laws constitutional. Put the case that it should be provided thJit professional gentlemen, clergymen, lawyers and physicians should only be required to prove their qualifications by their own oath or affirmation, or by their word of honor as British peers, and all other persons by the testimony of one or more witnesses on oath or af firmation, would any one, lawyer or layman, hesitate to pronounce elections so conducted to be unequal, and the provision therefore unconstitutional? On what conceivable principle can a distinction be drawn between such a case and that of an act establishing one rule for the people living in one elec tion district, and a different one for those in another—one rule for the peo ple of the city of Philadelphia, and an other for the people of the city of Pitts burg, and the other cities and counties of tne State? 1 have faithfully endeavored to discover, but without success. It was a wise foresight in the franjers of the funda mental law to declare that elections should be equal. What more likely to occur in the heat of political strife, which so often blinds the eyes of men to what is just and right in the pursuit of victory, than that a majority in [low er should attempt to maintain it by throwing embarrassments in the way of certain classes, whose sentiments they might know or fear to be adverse to them—to make the process of voting more troublesome, uncertain, dilatory, or expensive to them than to others, or to accomplish the same unjustifiable results as to some particular section of country, to whose inhabitants they may have rendered themselves obnox ious? Even although the fact may be that no duly qualified elector is neces sarily excluded from the exercise of the elective franchise, can the legislature make an invidious distinction between persons residing in one county and those residing ih another, any more than they can between different indi viduals? Indeed the argument, if sound, must logically lead to the last infereoce. Iff he legislature can say that the rule for the people of Phila delphia shall be one, and that for the people of Pittsburg another, they can equally well say that the rule for John Doe shall be one, and for Richard Roe BEDFORD, PA., FRIDAY MORNING, JULY 16, 1869. i another. The Constitution has, there j fore ,as it appears to me, wisely or- I da}tied that election laws shall operate equally upon all citizens and upon all parts of the Commonwealth. It has saicl to the legislators: "Whatever rules you establish in this matter shall affect the rights of all your constituents alike. Although on other subjects you may adopt the policy of local legisla iton 011 this most important one of elec tions your laws shall he equal." The violation of this fundamental article of the Declaration of Rights in i the act of April 17, 1809, now under consideration, is patent and undis j guised. The first seventeen sections j are general, and appear to provide for all parts of the Commonwealth. But the eighteenth section declares that "None of the foregoing provisions of tiiis act shall apply to the city of Phil | adelphia, excepting sections twelve j and thirteen." Sections twelve and i thirteen relate only to naturalization ! in court. The remaining sections, ex \ eept the nineteenth, twentieth and | thirty-eighth, which are immaterial as j to this question, apply exclusively to I the city of Philadelphia. They estab ' lish an entirely different system. No one can deny that if this act goes into operation we will have one code of election laws for the city of Philadel phia, and an entirely different one for all the other parts of the State. Ido not pretend to say that there may not be some varieties of local leg islation 011 this subject—looking to the convenience of the citizens of different sections- such as are merely modal. | For example, in some places addition | ai officers may be necessary, and the | time and mode of counting the votes , and making returns may be different; j so of the manner in which the tickets shall be voted: whether in separate bal lots or otherwise—the times of opening and closing the polls, and other minor details ol the same character. A dif ferent system is, indeed, absolutely re quired in the case of persons voting while in actual military service at a distance from their usual place of elec tion, but this difference is especially authorized by the amendment of the Constitution of 1864. Ido deny, how ever, that sucli differences as*l shall now proceed to enumerate are of this modal character. I think the mere statement of them will be enough to show that they are material and funda mental—seriously affecting the rights of the electors—affording facilities in the one system which are not afforded in the other. 1. By what I shall term the general system—meaning that provided for the State generally, the officers of the election are chosen as heretofore, by the electors of each election district. In Philadelphia they are to be appoint ed by a board composed of the alder men of the city—persons chosen by the several wards for the performance of entirely different duties. 2. By the general system the asses sors are bound to assess all persons claiming that privilege at any time up to the tenth day before the election, in Philadelphia no assessment can he made after the twentieth day of Sep tember in every year. 3. By the general system the asses sors are bound to assess all who claim a right to vote. In Philadelphia they are to assess only those who are quali fied voters at the time of the assess ment, and must annex their affidavit to the lists that every person whose name is contained therein is aquaiiffed elector, having a fixed res'.fence in the division to the best of their knowledge, information and belief. 4. By the general system a person whose name is not on the assessors' list may prove his qualification on the day of elections at the polls. In Phil adelphia he is required to make such proof, at least ten days before the elec tion, and to a different tribunal —the division canvassers. 5. By the general system the claim ant of a vote may prove his residence by any one qualified voter of the dis trict. In Philadelphia he is required to make such proof, in addition to his own oath or affirmation, by the affida vit of two qualified voters of the divis ion, whose names are contained in the assessors' division transcripts, under the head of private householders. 6. By the general system, in older to prove payment of taxes, the tax re ceipt need not he produced, if the affi ant shall state in his affidavit that it has been lost or destroyed, or that he never received any. In Philadelphia, if his name is not on the original asses sors' list, the tax receipt must be pro duced, and, in addition proof made by satisfactory evidence that the tax has been paid to the proper person au thorized to recieve it. 7. By the general system the asses sors are to place upon their list and as sess all persons claiming a right to vote, without any regard to their con dition or station in society. In Phila delphia they are forbidden to assessorig inally any person boarding at any ho tel, tavern, sailors' boarding-house or any person who has not a fixed resi dence in the district. 8. By the general system, tiie right of any person claiming to vote, may be challenged at the polls, by the qual ified voter. In Philadelphia no voter, whose name is registered, can he chal lenged at the polls on any question of residence. 9. By the general system persons of foreign birth, who have declared their intention to become citizens under the act of Congress, and who design to be naturalized defore the next election, may be assessed. In Philadelphia no one actually naturalized on or before the twentieth of September can be assess ed. I may be allowed to remark here, in passing, the author of the general sys tem seems, accidentally, to have over looked the fact that two classes of per sons of foreign birth might becomecit izens before the election by naturaliza tion without having declared their in tention, to wit: minors who arrived in the country under eighteen years, and soldiers honorably discharged from service in the army of the United States. lb. By the general system, the assess ment on the person can only be a per sonal tax under the act of Assembly of April 15,1834, section 4,(pamph, L,. 522), which heretofore in this city and 1 be lieve, elsewhere throughout the State, has been put at twenty-five cents. In Philadelphia there is a special election tax of fifty cents imposed on each voter when the original division transcripts are made out (section 27),) and when the extra assessments are made (sec tion 28), wi hout regard to the fact that tho personal tax may have been previ ously assessed and even paid. I have myself already been assessed for the year 1869, and have paid a personal tax of twenty-five cents. If 1 read this act aright, the assessors are bound to impose upon me an additional tax of fifty cents. I see no reason why this extra personal tax on the voters of Philadelphia might not be fifty dollars as well as fifty cents. There are other differences, which have not escaped my notice, but it would extend this opinion unnecessa rily to advert to them. Toe particu lars enumerated make it, I think, suf ficiently plain that the act of Assembly of April 17, lSf>9, establishes two sys tems of laws for conducting and regu lating elections, materially and funda mentally different, and if the position hereinbefore assumed be sound, that the declaration of rights in ordaining that elections shall be equal, means that the laws upon this subject shall operate equally and uniformly upon all classes of citizens and upon all parts of the State, then this act is unconsti tutional But elections are to be free as well as equal. By the freedom of elections T understand not only that the voters shall have free access to the [tolls in or der to exercise their franchise without intimidation by threats or physical force, employed in the language of the act of July 2, 1839, section 110 (Painph L, 543), "to influence unduly or over awe any elector, or to prevent him from voting or restrain the free dom of choice." hut also that full and free opportunity shall be afforded to ev ery person who is able to do so, to ob tain the qualifications made requisite by the provisions of the Constitution,in order that he may enjoy the rights of an elector, and that no regulations shall be enacted whose object or tendency shall be to impair or necessarily em barrass such acquisition, much less un der the pretence of regulation to pre vent it altogether. 1 will not stop to prove this proposition ; to my mind it is self-evident. It would be in vain for the Constitution to declare that all per sons, who have complied with certain prerequisites, shall enjoy the right of electors, if the legislature can by law exclude them practicJlly from such compliance. The sections of the act of April 17, 1569, which relate to the city of Phila delphia, do this effectively as to a large class of persons, though whether large or small matters not. The lirst section of the third article of the Con stitution, in declaring that "In elec tions by the Citizens every white free man of the age of twenty one years having within two years paid a state or county tax which shall have been assessed at least ten days before the election, shall enjoy the right of an electon," provides in effect that every such citizen shall have a period of time up to ten days before the elec tion to procure himself to be as sessed. If the legislature cannot dif rectly enlarge or abridge this time, neither can they indiectly accomplish the same thing by appointing a differ ent day for the closing of assessments. By the twenty-eighth section of the act of April 17' 18t>9, it is expressly en acted that "no extra assessments shall be made in the said city after the twen tieth of September in any year." This day so determined positively as the last day upon which assessments can be made, must be seventeen and may be twenty-four days before the second Tuesday in October. Thus the space of time allowed by the Constitution for assessment lias been manifestly a bridgod from seven to fourteen days. If it is competent to the legislature to do this they might, with equal show of right, enact that all assessments shall close six months before the election, and thus practically return to the Con stitution of 1790, in disregard of ti*' a mendment of 1839. This is as effectu ally to overide and trample upon the fundamental law as if they had under taken to alter its terms. It will be seen at once that ail those who from sickness or temporary absence from home, want of knowledge, or other cir cumstances, have not been able to make personal application to be assess ed on or before the twentieth ol Sep tember are precluded from the exer cise of the elective franchise, unless it should happen that they have been as sessed at some previous period. It cannot help a person to attend before the division canvasser on the tenth day before the election, for they have no power to assess a tax, nor can they by the express words of the act, place his name on the list unless he shall produce a receipt for the payment of a State or county tax, assessed agreeably to the Constitution. The argument for the unconstitution ality of the act might well be closed at this point. But there are some other provisions which 1 think ought to be particularly noticed. In making out the original divis ion transcripts, before the first day in June in every year, the assessors are required to classify the electors under the following heads, to wit: 1. Private house holders. 2. Private residents, (which 1 suppose, includes boarders at private hoarding-houses). 3. Keepers of hotels, taverns, sailors' boarding houses, or restaurants. "In making out the said lists the assessors shall not [dace thereon the name of any person boarding at any hotel, tavern, sailors' boarding bouse, or restaurant, or the name of any person who is not a quali fied elector, having a fixed residence in the division." After this positive prohibition we would naturally ex pect to find somewhere as positive a direction to place the names of these persons on the extra assessment list, or the list of the division canvass ers upon their personal application, and making their qualification to ap pear. The Constitution certainly does not exclude them. It does not require a fixed residence, whatever may be the meaning of that term. Admit however that they have the right to be placed ou these subsequent lists, under the general words of the act—what is the evidence, which they a? well as all others, whose names are design edly or accidentally omitted from the division transcripts, are required to produce? In addition to his own oath or affirmation, the claimant must prove by the affidavit of two qualified electors of the division, whose names are con tained on the assessors' division tran scripts under the head of private house holders, that he is personally known to them, that he is a bona Jhle resident of the di v ision ,a nd tha 11 hey veri I y bel ie ve that lie will be a qualified voter, enti tled to vote iu the said division at the next general election. Sections 28, 31, 33. Thus not only boarders at hotels, tavers, sailors' boarding houses and res taurants, who must make this proof, but residents with private househol ders, their sons, other relations, friends and servants, and also boarders in pri vate boarding-houses, whose names may ho designedly or accidentally o mit ted, have this unusual, invidious and burdensome kind of evidence cast upon them. They cannot avail them selves of the testimony of the keeper or clerk of tho hotel, but they must be able to secure the evi dence of two private householders, who must reside in the division, and their names must bo on tho assessors' divis ion transcripts under the head of pri vate householders, and they must be willing to depose ou path or affirma tion, from their own knowedge, that the claimant is a bona fide resident of she division, and, moreover, that they verily believe that he will bo a quali fied voter, entitled to vole in the said division at the next geneiial elec siou. The cla- upon whom this in vidious burden is laid is large and re spectable, comprehending journeymen mechanics, clerks in hanks, insurance offices and other corporations, as well as in stores aud manufactories, and un married workmen in all kinds of em- \ ployment, who arc usually Itoarders in some shape or other. Practically, numbers will find it very difficult, if not iinjwissible, to fulfill these condi tions. No such requirement is made in any other part of the State, not in Pittsburg, nor in any other large city. There the testimony of one qual ified elector is sufficient, whether he be a resident in the division or elsewhere, and that at the polls on the day of elec tion, when of course the witness will not be required to vouch his belief in tho existence of a qualification in future. But even if one of this unfortunate class of persons—being a private resi dent, or boarder at a privato boarding house—finds his name on the division transcript list he is safe. The division canvassers, at their session, ou the tenth day before the election, or at any ad journed session to be held on the eighth day, may in his absence, and without notice to him strike his name from the list by drawing a line in red ink through the same, upon the testimony of two reputable citizens qualitied vo ters of tho division whose names ap pear on the said transcript, under the head of private householders, to begiv iii under oath or affirmation, that such person is not a resident of the division, or is otherwise disqualified by law from voting at said election (Section 30). If he has procured himself to be placed on the extra assessment list by the production of the extraordinary ev idence required for that, he is still at the mercy ol' the district canvassers, who, in his absence and without no tice, yes, and without evidence, may strike his name from the list. "The aid canvassers shall also examine and re vise the extra assessment books of their respective divisions, and shall strike therefrom the names of all persons who are not residing in the divis ion on the tenth day before the elec tion" (Section 35.) Is it necessary to do more than simply recite these provis ions? Need I add, that in my judg ment, they are unreasonable, contrary to the first dictates of natural justice, and unconstitutional, because they unnecessarily embarrass and prevent the citizen from that free and full op portunity of qualifying himself for the exercise of the elective franchise, which the Constitution guarantees to him? After ail the complicated machinery which has been constructed in order to make up the final list of voters—the original assessors' division transcript prior to June—the board of aldermen— the extra assessment between the first and twentieth days of September, for five consecutive days, to be appointed 'by that board—the division canvassers, I with their revision of the list, on the tenth and eighth days before the elec tion, it is still perhaps a question upon the construction of the act, whether a duly qualified elector, whose name is not on the registry, may or may not prove his qualification to the election officers, and vote at the polls. In the fourth section, which relates to theoth ! or parts of the State, it is expressly de clared that on the day of election any j person whose name is not on theasses sors' list may prove his qualification | and he admitted to vote. The evidence which he is required to produce is por ; tiealarly described. There is no such provision in the sections which relate to Philadelphia. The evidence which shall be necessary before the assessors and division canvassers is carefully specified, as we have seen; but there is is not a word as to what shall be the evidence at the polls to the election of ficers, except the list and some things required in addition to it—production of tax receipts with proof of identity, andofcertifieatesof naturalization, witn out proof of identity, it may perhaps be argued, that, inasmuch as he is not expressly excluded, a qualified voter whose name is not on the list will still have a right to vote on giving the evi dence prescribed by the General Elec tion Law of July 2, 183 ( J, section Gi> (Pauiph. L. 531), which in this respect is not inconsistent with the provisions of this act, and, therefore, is not re pealed. But this would present a very gross incongruity; that two witnesses and of a very special character, shall be required to place a name on the list in advance, while at the polls the same thing can be done by the testi mony of onecompetent witness, who is a qualified elector, and who need not be a resident of the division. 1 conclude, therefore, that when it is declared in the thirty-sixth section, that the list when finally completed by the division canvassers, "shall constitute the regis try ofcitizens qualified to vote iu the said divisions respectively at the next general election" (section 30), it is an affirmative necessarily pregnant with a negative. If this be the true con struction of the act, then my settled conviction is that on that ground aloi.e it is unconstitutional. Election day is the proper time to prove the qualifica tions of an elector, if required by an inspector or challenged by a citizen; for, from the very nature of the facts which make up the qualifications, they cannot be proved before. Residence in the State one year, and in the elec tion district ten days, both periods of time to be immediately preceding the election, are past facts only complete and succeptible of proof then. No pre vious proof can anticipate and take the place of it. It is enough to say that the Constitution does not require tho eleetior to have the constant inten tion of continued residence in the State during the year, or in the dis trict during the ten days. At the com mencement of and during all that term he may intend to remove, and yet in fact continue to reside in the same place. If he removes from one district to a nothvr during the ten days he can neither vote at the old nor the new district. He loses His vote. A legis lative attempt to remedy this by tiie joint resolution of April 2(5, 1844, (painph, L. 605), was very properly de cided to be unconstitutional in Ewing's case, (J. S., Philadelphia, July 22, 18G2, MS. Although a person may have truly sworn ten days before that it was then his intention to continue his residence in the district until the day of election, he may change his mind and remove the next day. His witnesses may depose, with great sin cerity, that thej verily believe that, on election day, he will be a qualified voter, yet the result may show that they were mistaken in their belief.— On \vhat principle can an elector who proves on that day that he possesses every qualification prescribed by the Constitution, be deprived of iiis elec tive franchise because he has not prov ed what, in the very nature of things, he could not prove before? Let us take, however, the case of one, who, with every disposition to conform to the regulations which the legislatures have made, has applied aud been re fused both by the assessors and the di vision canvassers, because, by the ex press provisions of the act, his name could not he placed ou the list. A citizen of foreign birth hits been natu ralized the day before the election. — He could not have been naturalized itefore, because his time had not ex pired. lie offers his vote tuj.be elec tion officers at the polls, llels a citi zen—a white freeman of the age of twenty-one years—has resided in the Slate for one year, and in the election district ten days preceding the election, VOL 64.-WHOLE No. 5,498. and lias paid within two years a State or county tax, assessed at least teu days before the election. The tax may have been a personal one, assessed up on him at the previous triennial assess ment, or it may be upon property own ed by him. To reject such a vote i 3 to deprive him of an undoubted right; it is to violate the Constitution, which says positively, imperatively, he shall enjoy the rights of an elector. I need not add that if, in consequence of the prohibition contained in this act, he was not assessed ten days before the election, this system, which denies him that privilege, deprives him just as effectually by that means of his e leetive franchise as by rejecting his vote if he had been fully qualified. There is another matter which seems to need some explanation. After de claring, in the thirty-sixth session, that the final list shall constitute the registry of citizens qualified to vote, the act proceeds, "provided, that if any person so registered shall cease to be a resident of the division before the election, he shall not be entitled to vote therein." Yet the very next sec tion enacts with equal positiveness that "the said register shall he the only evidence that the persons whose names are found thereon have resided for ten days immediately preceding the said election in the said division, and no voter whose name is so registered shall lie challenged at the polls on any ques tion of residence." I do not know how these two provisions are to be rec onciled, or which is to give way, the first or the last, nor is it necessary now to consider that question. It will cer tainly be a very difficult one to decide, if it should ever arise. I do believe, however, after the fullest reflection, that an act of the legislature which makes a registry previously made up, conclusive evidence of the qualifica tions of all those whose names are on it, whether as to residence or anything else, as contrary to the Constitution as an act which undertakes to exclude those whose names are not found on it. On the whole, I am clearly of the opinion that the act of Assembly ap proved April 17,18651, is unconstitution al. I have not felt it to be my duty to examine particularly the provisions applicable to the other parts of the State. As was held last year by the Supreme Court, in relation to the act of April 4, 18G8 —because it undertakes to establish two different systems—the entire act, at least, so far as elections are concerned, except the first clause of the fortieth section, must fall under the same condemnation. There appear to be some sections in re lation to other matters upon which I am not called to give any judgment. The forty-third section, which repeals such other laws as are inconsistent with the provisions of the act, is of course, to be construed to mean such provisions as are constitutional and nave the force of laws. "This conclu sion," as was said by Chief Justice Thompson, in Page et al. vs. Allen et al., "leaves all the election laws in force which were intended to be super seded by this act." Injunction awarded, upon security being entered in the sum of one thous and dollars. I _ L E C T R I C TELEGRAPH IN CHINA. THE EAST INDIA TELEGRAPH COMPANY'S OFFICE, Nos. 23 & 25 Nassau Street, NEW YORK. Organized under special charter from the State of New York. CAPITAL $5,000,000 50,000 SHARES, $lOO EACH. DIRECTORS. Ho.i. ANDREW G. CURTIN, Philadelphia. PAUL S. FORBES, of Russell A Co., China. FRED. BUTTERFIELD, of F. Bu tterficld A C New York. ISAAC LIYERMORE, Treasurer Michigan Ccn tral Railroad, Boston. ALEXANDER HOLLAND, Treasurer American Express Company, New York. Hon JAMES NOXON, Syracuse, N. Y. O. 11. PALMER, Treasurer Western Union Tele graph Company, New Y'ork. FLETCHER WESTRAY, of Westray, Gibbs A Hardoastle, New Y'ork. NICHOLAS MIOKLES, New Y'ork. OFF! e E R S. A. G. CURTIN, President. N. MICKLES, Vice President. GEORGE ELLIS (Cashier National Bank Com monwealth,) Treasurer. HON. A. K. MeCLURE, Philadelphia, Solicitor The Chinese Government having (through the Hon. Anson Burlingame) conceded to this Com pany the privilege of connecting the great sea ports of the Empire by submarine electric tele graph cable, we propose commencing operations in China, and laying down a line of nine hundred miles at once, between the following ports, viz : Population. Canton 1,000,01X1 Macoa 60,000 Hong-Kong 250,000 Swatow 200,000 Amoy 250.000 Foo-Chow 1,250.000 Wan-Chu 200,000 Ningpo 400.000 Hang Chean 1.200,000 Shanghai 1,000,000 Total 5 010,000 These ports have a foreign commerce of $900,- 000,000, and an enormous domestic trade, besides which wo have the immense internal commerce of the Empire, radiating from these points, through its canals and navigable rivers. The cable being laid, this company proposes erecting land lines, and establishing a speedy and trustworthy means of communication, which must command there, as everywhere else, the commu nications ol' the Government, of business, and of social life especially in China. She baa no postal system, and her only means nowofcommuuicnting information is by couriers on land, and by stoam ers on water. The Western World knows that China is a very large country, in the main densely peopled; but few yet realize that she contains more than a third of the human race. The latest returns made to her central authorities for taxing purposes by the local magistrate make her population Four hun dred and Four tee a millions, and this is more likelv to be under than over the actual aggregate. Nearly all of these, who are over ten years old, not only can but do road and write. Her civili zation is peculiar, but her literature is as exten sive as that of Eurepe. China is a land of teach ers and traders; and the latter are exceedingly quick to avail themselves of every proffered facili ty for procuring oarly information. It is observed in California that the Chinese make great use of the telegraph, though it there transmits messages in English alone. To-day great numbers of fleet steamers are owned by Chinese merchants, and used by them exclusively for the transmission of early intelligence. If the telegraph we propose oonnocting all their groat seaports, were now in existence, it is believed that its business would pay the cost within the first two years of its suc cessful operation, and would steadily increase thereafter No enterprise oommonds itself as in a greater degree reaumcrative to capitalists, and to our whole people. It is of vast national importance commercially, politically and evangelically. "The stock of this Company has been un qualifiedly recommended to capitalists and busi ness teen, as a desirable investment by editorial articles in the New York Herald, Tribune, World, Times, l'ost, Express, Independent, and in the I'hiladclphia North American, Press, Ledger, Inquirer, Age, Bulletin and Telegraph. Shares of this oompauy, to a limited number, may bo obtained at $5O each, $lO payable down, $l5 on the Ist of November, and $25 payable in monthly instalments of $2.50 eaob, commencing December I, 18liS, on application to DREXEL d, CO., 31 South Third Street, PHILADELPHIA. Shares caii bo obtained in Bedford by applica tion to Reed A Soholl, Bankers, who are author ized to receive subscriptions, and can give all no cessary information on tee subject. Sept26yi