“President _pro tem._ Ferry, in a theatrical bass voice, called the Convention to order, and, after stating what it was convened for, opened one of the boxes and handed an envelope to Senator Allison, with a duplicate to Mr. Stone. It was from the State of Alabama, and on being opened, ten votes were recorded for Samuel J. Tilden, of New York. State after state was thus counted until Florida was reached, when the majestic Dudley Field arose and objected to the counting thereof. A brief discussion ensued, and the vote of Florida was turned over to the Electoral Commission. The Senate then returned to its chamber, preceded by the locked boxes, then nearly empty. “It was asserted by those who should have known that Judge Bradley, who had been substituted for Judge Davis, came near, in the discussion on the Florida votes, turning the result in favour of Tilden. After the argument upon the Florida case before the Commission, Judge Bradley wrote out his opinion and read it to Judge Clifford and Judge Field, who were likewise members of the Commission. It contained, first, an argument, and, secondly, a conclusion. The argument was precisely the same as that which appears in the public document; but Judge Bradley’s conclusion was that the votes of the Tilden electors in Florida were the only votes which ought to be counted as coming from the State. This was the character of the paper when Judge Bradley finished it and when he communicated it to his colleagues. During the whole of that night Judge Bradley’s house in Washington was surrounded by the carriages of Republican visitors, who came to see him apparently about the decision of the Electoral Commission, which was to be announced next day. These visitors included leading Republicans, as well as persons deeply interested in the Texas Pacific Railroad scheme. “When the Commission assembled the next morning, and when the judgment was declared, Judge Bradley gave his voice in favour of counting the votes of the Hayes electors in Florida! The argument he did not deliver at the time; but when it came to be printed subsequently, it was found to be precisely the same as the argument which he had originally drawn up, and on which he had based his first conclusion in favour of the Tilden electors.