Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1831-12-28

opinion of the grounds adopted by the Committee
forth IN the body OF their report The question before the
committee whether the burthen OF proof the
petitioner, shew that those voters which he objected
were not qualified by law, whether the sitting member
must shew that they were So The committee decided
that he bound shcw that they Illegal votes,
but That the burhcn of proof lay with the sitting member
his conclusion from the nposbiity the part of
the petitioner TO shcw that the votes were not legal where
as II was easy TO shcw ii they qualified, in what
their qualification consisted The same principle ap-
Piled in favor OF the sitting member, the petitioner
also required prove the qualifications OF the denied
by the sitting member The rule applied in the
manner 10 both 1t relieved either from the necessity of
establishing negative proposition, and made necessary
Tor each tosusiain Affirmative allegation
Mr. Rives wished TO submit the simple question
which OF the parties tho r0Jdndi lay la the first
paragraph of the report, three questions occurredas to
the noicethc bur;hcn of proof; and the qualifications
1.-THE House disposed TO take them up separately, he
was content lie only wished TO raise question, which
he had already stated.
The Speaker repeated the remarks which had before
made.
Mr. Rives said iftb6 House would consent, he would
move Tor decision IN the question.
Mr. Miller said that the rules of the House had better
be followed They must decide specific and tangible
question They could not act abstract principles.
The question the votes given good bad and
each member would decide according to his
ing on the Ncs aud the reasoning hc committee
He trusted the report would be regularly disposed of IL
they were to consider the question raSed they should
be perfectly out at sea-
Mr. Preston sustained the proposition of Mr. Rives. lie
thought the principle had been settled last year; the
subsequent election law seemed have raised new ques-
ton lie objected to adopting train OF reasoning offered
by the committee without examination and which
was impossible TO form opinion from the reading the
Clerks table He thought ii the custom to print
such documents, that the members might decide upon
scarcely TO give vote. AS TO the probdndi, it
ought to rest on the petitioner He calls in question all
the votes in the county, and throws upon the sitting
Der the of proof This should be, the sitting
member ought To be relieved from the odium of calling out
and questioning the vote oil every freebooter in the
aipcIt
as the settled policy adopted by the Legislature The
moalst had come here, according all the rules he
ought 10 have the benefit of them
Mr.. Stevenson then submitted the following resolutions
Resoiced, That the report the Committee of Privileges
and Elections on the memorial of John III. Vawter,
planning of the undue election and return of ]. w Kelly
from the County OF Monroe; be recommittcd said Com
mittee with instructions strike from the poll
party any vote objected 10 by the other party unless the
obecor shall have given satisfactory evidence of its c
galy.
Mr.. Riyes thanked the gentleman for submitting this
resolution, as brought the point directly before the
House. The practise had been changed last year
the Legislature passed law, containing new feature
There had before been Board of Scrutiny; but in
that act such board provided, constituted be
best capable of deciding which good votes of those
received at the elections This was principle in
the laws of Virginia. and the question which had occurred
under II was In reading the law il appeared
evident that the greatest socitude existed that this scru
ny might be full possible Mr.. II. here read the
section alluded to-The commissioners had performed
their duty, they scrunized the given, struck oil
such as in their opinion illegal votes and performed
the other acquisitions constitute the poll corrected the
poll OF the election for the county-The question them was
whether that poll, corrected, should furnish primd
fdcie evidence that each retained upon it was
a legal one 1t appeared upon the face of it, (mcan-
ing no dsrespcct TO the committee) that every vote
having been scrutinzed was a legal yote-and
any person who contested the legality of those votes,
should be bound prove his declaraonnot that he shout
fully establish that fact but, that he should adduce
thing TO rebut this strong presunptvc evidence that the
votes were good, from their having been the poll Poll
did undoubtedly dictate that the grounds for
If the House decided that the scrutiny was not D1d ia
ella evidence of the correctness of the poll they placed
in the power oil any individual 10 contest every
that poll. He believed there before the House
last year, in which 200 votes disputed; this very
committee had then evidence of the trouble eX-
aiming an those votes and after ALL most oil them were
sustained by the House. The decision of the House bv
passing this resolution would not be unfair unjust the
conteslng candidate He might put questions the in
dvidua voters and by their answers show whether or
not they were quaedIf, the contrary the contest
ing candidate finds that the list not land
HOLDER and he Declares the commissioners might saw
we know he Is not andhoder, but he house holder
or has some other qualification. This would be fair
butuns testimony He believed that the corrected list of
the polls was prmd faca evidence of the legality the
votes upon it, and that upon any who denied their
legality, the burthen of proof must rest
Mr. Marshall said that it had been argued by the gen
teman, that the corrected poll being pa facc evidence
OF its own correctness it cannot be aside excepting by
rebuting testimony The consequence of this principle
appeared TO Mr.. Marshall TO be The destruction of any
farther attempts elections If the principle of
the gentleman was that there never could be an appca
from the judgment of the Board of scrutiny there could
be no contest Tor the conesng application for that
very appeal If the examination by the board were TO be
csioppe there possibility that there could ever
be contest, forby the petition of the conesting candidate
he asks 10 be allowed shew that the Commissioners
incorrect How the legality of the votes be deter
mined by the board BY the land books and records
the county clerk. Let these be shewn, and they were
PFnd fdce evidence. But suppose the scrutniZcrs in
passing over the land books hastily, make a misakc-sha
this House not be allowed to it, and was there TO
be no inquiry into the facts? Ii might be that the Com
mssoncrs had required certain voters give proof of
their qualifications and here the question of the burthcn
OF proof would The principle of law of last scs
sion was the that Of the former law Was the de-
cision OF the commissioners, correct the ONLY aues
ton In regard TO the remark of the gentleman from Pres
ton, as to the odum of calling and examining the
qualification OF all the voters his poll being thrown
upon the returned candidate; 1t not so. The land
books would be taken proof But even were the odiun
Of calling out the voters be thrown upon the sitting
member he could return the compliment, and force the
rontesng candidate TO call and examine all the voters
On his poll
nittcd by Mr. Stephenson, to give ii the following
orm:
ReSoiUed, That the Report of the Committee of Priy-
eges and Elections the memorial of John H. Vawtcr
complaining OF the undue election of John w Kelly from
The county OF Monroe, be recomnitted said committee
with instructions TO consider the corrected poll of the cleo
ion in said county, prn0 fdcie, presumptive evil
Hence OF the legality of the of said corrected poll
Mr. Brodnax TO explain the vote he should give on
This motion 1t would be rccollected hat this same point
was The subject of grave proposition last year, and that il
was decided by small majority, that, whenever an cleo
ion was contested, the pTObdndi should rest upon
Inc party assuming the affirmative. He was in favor of
hat decisionand he differed both from the gentle
man from FaIquier and Campbell I he corrected poll
hnr. ,si.