Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1831-01-08

~
Perly conducisd-he, Mr.. b. and himself, would have
been elected.
Mr.. b oadus wished to ask another que don. II
wa, whether the gentlemen considered the conduct
Of the Sheriff, in the delay Of which he had complain
cd, and by which he prev spted from giving legal
notice-wbeher tbls i,resulAri,y hsJ any effect on
the rt gulari,y OF his, MIR. D's return.
Mr. Pendls ton said, tn & he had referred to tina
circumstance, as having acinsly deprived him Of the
pow OF giving notice. But ss n gross reeularity,
which OUGHT TO be taken into Consideration by The
House. He did not suppose il affected the geDtomans
a. he was entitled to his return.
Mr.. b oadus aid he OF crpion, that every man,
woman and child In the county believed him to have
been elected L. was admitted by the o'her candidates;
but II the eles ton vacated, how should he staDds
Could the II use make reservs lou 10 his avor! He
had received no notice from aty one, aud on that
ground he had supposed himself out oil the scrsp-.
Mr. Leigh observed, that a. silusioD had been made
o some remarks OF his, he case Of the Patrick E.
lection, he thought proper to siste to the House the
eonr'e he .hou'd pTr'1e. 10 csc ,ihl.r question
thoueh his opinion the same, he should, II that
question again raised, W. the House, IL had
decided IL by vote Of more than ,ro.thirds There
were two rules on such case. The House, in con-
siderDg questions OF the nature OF ,h acts Court
II Jud cature, md fts teci,ons ought such, 10 be
looked upon formai declaration OF s judicial opie
io,.-and It would DO 1pgrsei5as Ia any gentle man, to
act up his opinion In opposition 20 that Of the House,
expressed by so la majority OF lie m-mb.rs. This
was ihe had now TO ray on 'bat sutj'ci. But the
question now wss, upon the necessity Of giving the
notice required by law, order sustain contest Of
an election this hoNr. His opnirn was al,o formed
on that que.ton but he did ro' ihik proper now to
express it. On The tu ject of swsaring Commission
ers, however il sgain came ur, lie houd set his
| own opinion against that OF the House.
| Mr.. GIner ob erved. ih,t wh-n h. NOV, d the adj
jour nmen Satur ay, it VS. no, with the view Of
enting his own ideas 10 the HOUSE but TO give an
opporuI ity to the gentle from Culprper who FIRST
appeared at the bar this morning, % be heard in this
lie did aa intend o
que the general question but TO rive the people OF Vr
mia the reasons, why the Report Of the Committee
ought not to be adortd. lie dill rot agree with any
proposition OF the Committee. He was no, enc of It's
member.-and, therefore. dil not know the grounds
which they were Sustained He could judge OF il on
ly from the face OF The Report But the question
Cured to him. whch the ehts OF indv duals tbs
rights OF the State OF Virginia. to be regarded in
this case' There could scarcely be doub, as 20 tho
decision on that question. Members held their seats
here by the will Of the people, vho'e rights they
ought 10 represent and defend. They had indivi"
dual right TO sit here but what derived from the
sovereign people, But what the question decided
by the Report OF the Committee Was il hs rights
OF the people OF Cuipepsr, whether individual
or another should occupy two feet square on one OF
these benches iThe public will ought be regarded
and the House ought 10 disregard teshDico les, which
had tendency TO obstruct the development Of the
ruth, initial 10 knowledge OF the real will of the
| majority Of the people. H-wever the COMMITTEES
might be bound by those tecbDicaltes, he could
b. swsyed by any such considerations from the great
made cole judge Of Is own eiectionshey were judges
OF the wtoe subject 1t was very true that the lie.
gsature had made laws upon the subject-he Legsla.
ture, and not the House OF Dele hat were
the bjects Of these laws l-Surey not 10 fetter the
re hts Of the people but to protect tbem--snd he
could regard them no farther than they had tendency
have the effect TO destroy the re hts of the peo.
pie he was oppcsed 10. them because he iet more
interest 10 Their inere than in those Of individuals,
aud was not willing 70 allow the latter to be sustained,
10 opposition TO the former, soiey by the force Of legal
technicalies. With regard 10 n Rcpor, Of the Com
mttee, declar.d that they had declined going into
thu tas tha fahI k,.I
DOT been given by the gentleman who presented the
testimony. This mere iormslity the only ground
for declining to enquire into facts, which would at
have developed the whole merits OF the ca e. They
had this testimony before them, aud yet they would
not look at it, becaue all the legal tormaes had
been complied with by Mr.. PehdletoD. But Mr.. G.
commended, that there notice, end one which
would be considered legal in any Court of Justice in
The Country. He held that paper in his hand which II
bate OF saurdsy.-lMr. G. here read the notice sent
by MIR. Gibson to the citing Member dated 30ib Octo.
ber There affidavit on the back Of this paper
proving that had been served the sitting embor
And what did the law require That a notice should
be given of the intention 10 contest, and the grounds
on which the seat would be contested. And he would
AK, If this paper did not gve both Of hess points Of
informaonsnd why, there fore, il legal and
sufficient notice But IL was said that II
notification 10 app before the Sheriff. where the
testing candidate would demand the return. But how
were the declarations OF that gentleman to be made
ply applicable 10 diseussos befure the Sheriff -?
The sesations made in the paper 10 be sustain
Had not the Committee Of Privileges and Elec-
told hem, that the Sheriff could return Mr.. A.
or Mr. h. but that he mast rearn the candidate who
had the greatest number OF votes But there cir
cumstsnces which explained the motive with which
this paper written, ~ il not nteuded that it
should sD.w a. Do'ee Of contest why was il beref
Why did Mr.. Gbion, after the Sheriff had returned
the sitting Member. and take testimony the
legality OF the election Was that t. timony to be
prest n,d to The Sheriff Ill now lay the table, and
before this House Then, he would ask whether
THE notice did not cente mpiae CONTEST beioTe this
House. independently OF the Sheriff having no risht
TO the sutjci, the pursued by the con-
testing candidate thfovg hoUt, evnced de alton
t, contts the election here the grounds Of its lille.
gal mana cement On the other haAd, Pendeton had
collected mas' OF testimony, which had not vet
been read, slthough preeisely the description Of
the evidence II the contestDg Candidate. Willis
II not objected to by the i'ting member,
wa valid But they were not permitted 10 read it,
not" iihs andiDg II was testimony which did affect
the rgbvo A. b., hut those Of The sovereign peos
rls Being OF that character, he thought they were
bound 10 take up. He would quire Of the learned
Chairman Of tie conn iuee, whrIbor there was any
specific fotn Tor notice in such cs'ei Was suy
'biug required than the declaration Of The DtenA
ton contest before h. VI. of ID and the reasons for
II! Aud they suppose fat this notice related 10
contest before the 81 efiH alone No ie,imouy was
produced before the Sheriff, but IL there had been.
nv a. obId II not se examined here, this body having
appellant jurisdiction over tie whols subject He was
NJ, 90 scTnpuioUs the comm,tee-he would examine
any notice or psper which gave light upon the subj CT
no inside this notice The eopte. ting candida l-snd
.hs he come b6te Al or hdvif made these allegations,
and tsy-' will not ex mine then or N he did cay
so he TO be upperled by the House IN the deela
iton That individual had raised the question Of the
legality &C ne ele elton and he had power now TO
Ial6 al III ha ~ Cttl.