Official returns of the sheriff in the counties composing the sixth congressional district of the State of Tennessee, of an election for representative from said district in the Congress of the United States, held August 3, 1865.

STATE OF TENNESSEE, Lawrence county:

I, A. M. Harrison, sheriff of the county and State aforesaid, do hereby certify that at a popular election held according to law at all the election grounds in said county, except two, at which a sufficient number of persons did not attend to hold an election, on the 3d day of August, 1865, for the purpose of electing a member to Congress from the sixth congressional district of Tennessee, Samuel M. Arnell received three hundred and thirty-five votes, and D. B. Thomas one hundred and one votes. This August 7, 1865.

STATE OF TENNESSEE, Wayne county :

A. M. HARRISON, Sheriff.

This is to certify that at a popular election held by me in Wayne county on the first Thursday, it being the 3d day of August, 1865, for a member to the Congress of the United States, the following was the result: For S. M. Arnell, four hundred and seventy-nine votes ; D. B. Thomas, seventy-four votes; Moody, one vote. I certify that the above is a correct list of all the votes polled in said county. This 7th day of August, 1865.

STATE OF TENNESSEE, Hardin county:

JOHN GRIMES, Sheriff.

I do certify that at a popular election held according to law at the respective election grounds in all the civil districts in the county of Hardin and State of Tennessee, on the 3d day of August, 1865, for members of Congress, that A. M. Arnell received four hundred and eighty-eight votes, and D. B. Thomas received eighty-three votes. This 7th day of August, 1865.

STATE OF TENNESSEE, Perry county:

N. M. D. KEMP, Sheriff of Hardin county.

1. John S. Webb, sheriff of said county, do certify that I caused to be opened and held an election in said county on the first Thursday in August, 1865, for members to Congress. Arnell received one hundred and fifty-three votes; Thomas received six votes. August 6, 1865.

Sheriff.

I do certify that a popular election in Lewis county was held according to law on the 3d day of August, 1865, for a member to Congress; Samuel Arnell fifty-seven votes, and Thomas five votes. This August 4, 1865.

STATE OF TENNESSEE, Maury county:

of August, 1865,

M. D. BROWN,
Sheriff Lewis county.

I, William M. Sullivan, sheriff of Maury county, do hereby certify that at an election began and held at the different precincts in my county, on the 3d day 1resentative for the sixth congressional district of Tente in the next Congress of the United States, all the judges and clerks being according to the 7th section of the franchise act of 1865, that after Comparing all the votes polled in said election, I find that D. B. Thomas has received six hundred and twenty-eight votes, and S. M. Arnell four hundred and furteen votes. Given under my hand at office, this 5th day of August, 1865.

ΕΝΟΡΗ

WILLIAM M. SULLIVAN,
Sheriff Maury county.

STATE OF TENNESSEE, Hickman county:

I, Joseph Beasley, sheriff of the county of Hickman, of the State of Tennessee, hereby certify that I caused to be held an election in the various civil districts of said county to elect a member to Congress on Thursday the third day of August, 1865; and the following is the result of the vote polled in my said county, to wit: S. M. Aruell received one hundred and forty-three votes; D. B. Thomas received one hundred and eight votes.

Witness my hand at office, this seventh day of August, 1865.
JOSEPH BEASLEY, Sheriff

STATE OF TENNESSEE, Humphreys county:

I, M. M. Massey, sheriff of said county, do hereby certify that the following is a true account of an election as returned to me, began and held on the third day of August, 1865, in the several precincts of said county, for the purpose of electing one representative to represent the sixth congressional district of the State of Tennessee in the Congress of the United States. Candidates' names: Samuel M. Arnell received one vote; D. B. Thomas received three hundred and ninety-one votes.

Given under my hand at Waverly,

M. M. MASSEY, Sheriff Humphreys County.

The sheriff of Dickson county returns the original poll-books showing the following result :

I certify that at an election held on Thursday the third day of August, 1865, for the purpose of electing a representative for the sixth congressional district Tennessee, the full returns for each civil district in this county have been carefully examined by me, which show that D. B. Thomas received 437 votes, and that S. M. Arnell receivod 49 votes.

BENJAMIN LYLE, Sherifi,

By O. M. BLACKMAN,
Deputy Sheriff, Montgomery County.

Governor W. G. BвOWNLOW.

Collier.

I certify that at a popular election held according to law in the respective election grounds in all the districts in Stewart county, State of Tennessee, on the third day of August, 1865, for member to Congress, that D. B. Thomas received seven hundred and twenty-seven (727) votes; that Arnell received five (5) votes; that N. Brandon for representative for Stewart county, received five hundred and thirty-nine votes; that Barnett Crockerell received one hundred and nineteen votes; that Jesse Glasgow received four (4) votes, this fourth day of August, 1865.

W. T. REEL, Sheriff.

The official returns of the fifth regiment Tennessee cavalry show the following result S. M. Arnell, eleven votes; D. B. Thomas, none.

The official returns of the sixth Tennessee cavalry show the following result : S. M. Arnell, sixty-four (64) votes; D. B. Thomas, none.

The official returns of the seventh regiment Tennessee cavalry show the following result: S. M. Arnell, two (2) votes; D. B. Thomas, none.

The following is a tabular statement of the vote of the sixth congressional district, as copied from the books of the secretary of state:

STATE OF TENNESSEE, County of Davidson, ss:

William G. Brownlow, governor of the State of Tennessee, being duly sworn, deposes and says that he is governor of the State of Tennessee; that the papers hereto annexed, being printed matter, and marked Exhibit A and Exhibit B, are true and correct copies of my report to the general assembly of the State of Tennessee, and special message to the said general assembly. Exhibit A containing correct copies of the said report, and my several proclamations in reference to the subject-matter of said report. Exhibit B containing a special message in reference to violations of the franchise law and other public matters, of date H. Mis. Doc. 72-2

Collier.

April 13, 1866. All of which I certify to be official, correct, and true, as therein more fully appears.

W. G. BROWNLOW.

Sworn to and subscribed before me, and reduced to writing in my presence, this 21st day of February, A. D. 1867.

N. A. PATTERSON, Judge of Judicial Circuit of Tennessee.

EXHIBIT A.

Gentlemen of the general assembly:

EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT, Nashville, Tennessee, November 25, 1865.

In compliance with your joint resolution, adopted November 23, 1865, I have the honor to make the following report:

On the 10th of July last, seeing a general disposition to disregard the “act to limit the elective franchise," I issued my proclamation requiring a strict execution of the law, and announcing "that all the votes of all persons and counties contrary to the strict provisions of this law will be thrown out and not taken into account."

After the election, being assured that the law had "been in some counties erroneously construed, and in others wilfully evaded, and in some instances totally disregarded," I issued my proclamation calling upon the clerks and sheriffs and loyal citizens for information as to the manner in which voters had been registered and the election held. Copies of these proclamations are herewith presented.

Most of the clerks and sheriffs of the various counties of the State have responded to the inquiries made in the proclamation of August 11, and I regret to find I was not mistaken in my apprehensions that the law had been extensively misconstrued and disregarded.

Certificates of registration seem to have been obtained generally in five dif ferent modes:

First. Where the applicant was known to the clerk to be of publicly known Union sentiments.

Second. Upon proof by witnesses that the applicant came within the provis ions of the "act to limit the elective franchise."

Third. Upon the oath of the applicant alone that he came within some of the provisions of the law.

Fourth. The production of an oath of allegiance or amnesty, taken at some time by the applicant.

Fifth. Where the applicant was certified or vouched for by some official. either civil or military.

With some doubts as to the legality of issuing certificates to persons of pub licly known Union sentiments without proof, the clerk being the judge, I have, nevertheless, admitted that method of registration where there was no evidence of abuse of the discretion assumed by the clerk.

The second method enumerated is clearly legal, but the last three are as clearly illegal.

Believing that an applicant for registration must either be known to have been a man of publicly known Union sentiments, at all times, or must produce proof under oath that he comes within the provisions of the law, I have, in the application of this construction, "thrown out and not taken into account," the votes cast in the following counties as illegally registered, viz: Hawkins, McMinn. Monroe, Meigs, Grundy, Van Buren, White, Putnam, Jackson, Macon, Coffee,

Franklin, Marshall, Benton, Williamson, Davidson, Sumner, Robertson, Cheatham, Maury, Humphreys, Montgomery, Stewart, Lawrence, Gibson, Weakley, Madison, and Lauderdale.

The vote of the following counties having been registered in the one or the other of the two modes first enumerated have been taken into account, viz:

Johnson, Carter, Greene, Cocke, Jefferson, Sevier, Grainger, Union, Knox, Campbell, Anderson, Morgan, Blount, Bradley, Hamilton, Polk, Marion, Bledsoe, Meigs, Warren, Smith, DeKalb, Rutherford, Lincoln, Giles, Cannon, Coffee, Franklin, Wilson, Hickman, Wayne, Dickson, Hardin, Henry, Obion, Dyer, Carroll, McNairy, Putnam, Hardeman, Shelby, and Haywood.

From the following counties I have no satisfactory reports, the presumption being in favor of the legality of the registration, viz: Sullivan, Washington, Hancock, Scott, Polk, Roane, Sequatchie, Cumberland, Fentress, Rhea, Overton, Bedford, Perry, Lewis, Decatur, Henderson, Fayette, and Tipton. The following table shows the vote of cach district as shown by the original returns, and, also, as modified by omitting counties improperly registered: