Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1830-05-14

ton lie has assumed: unless indeed, it showed an
application made, and decided. upon the ground TINT
the law gave discretion that tie oqyo1. could, I'M,
der no circumstances, continue the poll Deer.
II Is objected, secondly, that he dispositions taken
on my behalf are illegal, anc, therefore, ough, not
to be 'read as evidence unwilling Mr. Chair
man, to take up the time Of the Committee in follow,
ing out the course Of reasoning, urged in support OF
this Objection, as floents Consideration viii ena-
testimony should be rejected because it was taken
according to the form prescribed By law "concernng
disputed elections of members of the General
oiyof virginia. Mark, Sir, there is no act of Con
gross IN FORCE prescribing the mode Of taknn depos
tons IN contested elections. Is,t Tho Const;,,,.io,
OF the United States provides that the electors in
each state OF members to this House. shall have the
guucations requisite for eccter. in the most nun1e
rous branch of the State Legislature. The mode
then prescribed By the laws of the several States
l~he,e laws exist on the subject for ascertaRsg the
Guahcaeiors of electors, in other words of deter
mining the right of vctsrs IN disputed elections, if
NOT the only, must unqoestlonaSy be the best mode
OF establishing tate Qualifications and determining
ene sd'"e rights IN contest for seat here. II this
oplection however, could derive any aid whatever,
from the allegation that the act applies exclusively to
contest for n seat IN the Legislature Of Virginia
some contamination must first appear to have result
ed from the simple act of appointing these commits
s'oners before such appointment can be made i'm
pair, the smallest degree, the evidence taken be
fore them-for justices of the peace, and noaries
public, (for the borough OF Norfolk and county of
NanscuioHd they were fully authorized, by the laws
ter end possessing that power, come up TO the full
measure of competency, denlunded by the argument
urged IN supper. of the objection. Eut i, is suili-
Gent that the testimony exhibited on NV behalf 10
the only evidence admissible before the Legislature
OF Virginia IN contested e!ecton-tc qualifications
requisite in electors of membcrs to either branch
there, and to this body, being precisely the same.
The evidence produced on behalf OF the sitting
member would be received in the Legislature oil
Virginia, i'll determining the qualifications Of the
electors OF the most numerous branch. And have |
always believed, that whatsoever doubt Difficult
~ arose IN any investigation carried b. the Com
ittee on Elections of this House. the settled pruc-
trce and decisions Of the State legislatures upon the
point. whether as to principle form of proceeding
were regarded as high authority, If not conclusive
ID cases, mean, where, in this express regula
tioE of Congress exists III relation to the matter
Upon this ground alone, should be corteat to rest
the validity OF The testimony. Get, Sir, it will be |
recellocted, that have raised objection to the
mode adopted by the sitting member in taIiup his
evidence; and whist he protests so vei,cr,enty
the proceeding indicated i'll the lazy as my aui.e is
not little remarkable, that, after having received
from me- IN due form, notice, with llss of votes Oh
Jected to on the several polls taken for Kim in the
district he should huve moved pa7 ,ussu in return
ing similar lists of votes the polls taken for me-
precisely IN the form, and within the time prescribed
by this very act, the authority of which h. repud,
ates! This is atested by the documents; but it will
not be denied. For what measure, would ask was
this done, but the convenience of the thing-the
convenience II not positive necessity OF foIlowiur
some rule, end in the absence Of any regulation of
Congress the subject, it could not cscope the az.
ention of the member that the mode of proceedings
marked out IN his own sete law, for attaining the
same end was. to say the leass of it. safe and rood
Fhe docunsnte Will further show that after this first
step the dersrtnr9 By the sittse re,,,bn, hio,eaif
flom THIS good and safe mode Of proceeding, led to
ell the Inconvenience experienced in subseot,eut 81,
ges ef the content. The oct Of the Virginia ssern
bly, provides shat, 10 CONTESTED ELECTION the petition
er aud the returned member shall respectively begin
to take the'r dispositions within TWO nDnti,s after
Gil tINn
there an obvious propriety in it. Accor din iy
| On due notice. commenced within two months.
The sitting member did commences till nearly four
| months had expired. Now, MS there was no esta,,-
iished rule OF proceeding coeTcive upon him. (and
concede that none existed, contending for nothing
more than that no injury could possibly result but
on the contrary, much good from the course which.
pursued,) Tas he not upon his oN,n hypothesis-
upon the broad principle Of what is due between man
and man. bound to act with di!igences IF both par
ties In such case, are not held TO proceed within
reasonable time, (Which any law it might be the plea
sure Of Congress TO enact upon the subject would
certainly prescrbe) then contrasting grat here is
On idle mockery for he who gets possession of
1t, may fold his arms in perfect secusty-may retain
1t BY procraslination indefinitely, only without
having obtained ajority of legal votes in the cleo
tsn but 10 opan, continued and santon defiance of
the electoral body. advert to fhis Sir, not in a
spirit OF complaint, bus supply as showing that the
moment the sitting member ie.. the Plaiu onward
path before him. he found himself begiIds.Cd aud 10
no little danger OF losing his way. Have we not |
evidence of this in Of the papers annexed to this
report He then says, THAI naDy are fully satisfied
that the petitioner had bad on his poll in
tne borough OF Norfolk than his majority over rne |,
there He could not object on my poll in the borouoh
to more than twenty-seven votes; his not obisc !
ting to larger number, if he could is not owin1 to
fosoearanee-- twenteths of which are GOOD
votes On his poll iii the borough objected 20 one
hundred and sixtyax. believe | arII entitled to q
majority of legal votes in the borough ana rthsr
examination Of The poll could prove e." This sweep.
ing charge of perjury against more than one hua.
folk borough it is modestly in.imated by the
sitting member, would be sustained, " he o:IyI
lad 9DcTe time, Notwithstanding seven months had
elapsed, from the close OF the election to the meet
ing OF Congress; and this periured list dnring tbs
nteTim'was submitted, you cannot fail to perceive
TO the most close and searching examination The
lnaIect application here made for farther time is
think conclusive, to show one of two THINGS either
discovery of some fatal in the course he has
pursued, or conviction in the mind of the Gentle.