Rutland herald. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1823-1847, 1839-12-09


tanned whether there quorum ot mcmneIs
prcscp, At present nothing could be done. lie
therefore hoped that the members present would ac-
ouicsre in a motion ot this KIND, IN order mat inc
House nigh, Immediately proceed with us organih-
alton: after which this question should be brought
UP and acted upon
Mr.. Maxwell conicndel that they ough, not TO
adopt this suggestion unless some good reason
could he given for passing over the State OF New
Jersey There had been sent on TO the CLERK ccfti-
Gcatcs in the usual form, which have been read and
it seemed 10 him that it would be an extraordinary
course To pass over the State OF New Jersey, after
these certificates had been produced.
The Clerk then said that there were three propo-
sitions brought the notice of the body; one, TO read
tho law the other. TO read the testimony in the pos
session of the Clerk and then to pass over the state
of New Jersey until twas ascertaned whether there
was quorum in attendance.
Mr. Wise said, that before any motion was put to
the body he wished TO know who was to vote ON the
motion TO lay this question on the table Had the
names of n quorum been called oyerl II not, who
were entitled to vote on this question 1.-THE ques-
ton was put before the roll was called, who was en-
titled TO vote Would the clerk answer what was
the usual course in case of that kind' Had he,
(Mr. w n right 10 vote on this question:
The Clerk said il was not for him to decide as TO
what course the House ought TO pursue in relation
to this matter.
Mr.. Wise, Has any member a right to move to
Law this matter on the table
The clerk SAID that would be matter Tor the
House 10 decide.
Mr. Mercer thought that the motion of his col
league Rives would raise the very difficulty which
il the desire of the gentleman to avoid. To
avoid difficulty, however, he (nr. Ny would consent
that all the testimony should be read before the law
read but then he desired TO have the law read
in order that il might be seen what could be taken
evidence in the present case.
Mr. ltives did not desire that a vote should be Ia
ken upon the question Of passing over the State of
New Jersey, but hoped that it might be done by the
general consent of the members present, in order
that the clerk might go and ascertain whether
there were quorum of members in Attendance
When this was done the house could Immediately
return to this question: and receive evidence on both
sides examine discuss, and come to correct con-
illusions upon it. He hoped there would be gen
eral disposition on the part of the gentlemen pur-
sue this course.
Mr. Hoffman said the proposition call the
roll of the House. What roll of the IIouse1 Who
the members that called upon to decide this
question Who but those holding the legal certifi-
Gates The clerk he'd no right to call his
less he produced on his table a legal Certificate
The gentlemen from n. Jersey, whose names have
been called have produced the legal certificates from
the Governor, and as much entitled to their seats
as any member in the house. Ifthcre were two sets
of certificates from the Governor of New Jersey of
equal force and effect, then there might be
son for passing by that state but it was not the
case, and the gentlemen had laid the only legal
evidence of election before the House, ii would be
incompetent for the body TO pass the State of
New Jersey, and proceed in calling the balance of
the roll.
Mr. lIastead said he was of the members from n
Jersey, and he demanded, a representative ofthc
sovereign state of New Jersey, that his name should
be called The only reason given by the Clerk for
not calling his name was, that Their, was other evil
dence upon his table, and that there other per-
sons claiming the seats of the members from New
Jersey. lie would ask the Clerk however, wheth-
er this other evidence under the seal ofhe state
OF New Jersey, and produced according to the known
and established usages of that state, from the forma
ton OF It's constitution to the present day lie main
tanned that he had pruna facc evidence that he was
entitled to seat that floor, because he had a
commission from the Governor, under the broad
seal OF the state, and that the Clerk bound to
! call his name. He and his colleagues had their
commissions from the Governor of New jersey the
| proper officer TO give commissions and he asked
what authority had this House, or any House, to
say that those certificates should be disregarded,
and that the State of New Jersey should be passed
| by
There authority-here was no power I'M
der the Constitution to do so. The Constitution of
! the United States says that the times places and
manner OF holding elections, shall be prescribed by
the legislature OF each state Then as this matter
had been decided upon by the state authority il is
conclusive, until II is reversed by the decision Of
the House of Representatives which is alone under
the Constitution, competent to decide on the auaif-
cations OF its members. Then his position was un-
I'll this House was properly organized, and decided
| upon the question, the commission of the Governor
must DO taken prna ocie evidence of his right to
a seat on that floor. He argued that he was emit
tied to his seat until Speaker was chosen the oahs
were administered, and the question was ludcially
decided upon by the House and until that was
done, the House had no right to make judicial de-
csion which might forever destroy the sovereignty Of
the state of New Jersey. For this reason he could
not consent TO submit this question to the decision
OF gentlemen here. lie could not tell who were en-
u'lcd to vote upon it, could the Clerk undertake
to decide who should vote on the question Was
ne to vote upon the question, or was he to with
draw The question, in his opinion, had already
been decided by the only competent tribunal, and
That decision must stand until reversed by the decis
ION OF the House after it was properly organized.
u Mr. A. then read the law of New Jersey on the
subject, quoted the ofthe Mississippi election.
the case ofSpauldlng and Mead, and Of Moore and
Letcher' 10 support Of the position which he had
taken' AMI argued that the certificate Of the Cover
nor, whether given properly or not was conclusive
evidence OF his right 10 a in the first instance
ana that he was entitled to hold il until the House
was organized and the matter was decided upon the
, petition OF the conesling members
Mr. linz l.aa.