Case ID: rep-cont-el_1/html/0001-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

1780-1781.
    AMHERST.
    A petition was received at the October session, from sundry inhabitants of the town of Amherst, praying that a precept might be issued to them, for the choice of a representative, in place of Nathaniel Dickinson, Jr., returned a- member from that town, whose election they alleged to be illegal. The petition was referred to a committee, who reported by way of resolve, which was read and agreed to, and in pursuance of which, a citation was sent to the selectmen of Amherst to show cause, why the prayer of the petitioners should not be granted.
    
      
       1 J. H. 27. The first general court, under the constitution, commenced it* session on the last Wednesday in October, 1780. See the journal of the convention of 1780, p. 186.
    
    
      
       2 J. H. 55.
    
    
      
       Same, 88.
    
   At the January session following, the petition, and an answer of the selectmen of Amherst thereto, were taken up and referred to a committee, who reported, by way of resolve, that the parties be heard, on the third Wednesday of the session, and that the selectmen give notice thereof to the petitioners, by serving them with a copy of the resolve. The report was not agreed to; but the question was immediately taken whether the member from Amherst was duly elected, and decided in the negative.

A precept was then ordered to be issued to the town of Amherst for a new election..

[The papers in this case are missing from the files; and neither the reasons, upon which the election was controverted, nor those upon which the house founded its decision, appear on the journal.] 
      
       Same, 191, 192.
     
      
       2 J. H. 192.