The Hawk-eye and Iowa patriot. (Burlington, Iowa) 1839-1843, 1840-04-09


discrimination, and without stopping to
enquire whether the elections were held
in the manner prescribed by law, when
they knew that allegations had been
made and partially established that all
these matters would be proven, and many
Of them, perhaps enough, already proven
by the testimony then before them, to
change the result, at least in part, if they
would have opened and examined it.
But this the committee conclude, and
labor throughout their report to prove,
they were not authorized to do, because
they were directed to report forthwith on
the lawful votes, and that the effect of
that omnipotent and pungen, word s'forth-
with" neutralized and nullified the word
lawful, and rendered it perfectly nuga.
tory; and that, being required to report
forthwith the lawful votes, they were OF
necessity compelled to regard all unlaw-
full votes as lawful votes, and that was
what the House intended when, by a
vote of 81 to 90, they determined 10 IN
sert it.
Why, then, did these gentlemen them
selves resist its introduction 1t was
precisely what they desired 1t was ex-
actly what they had struggled for in COM
miltee, and why did they not put the
same construction on their own act in
committee, when by the casting vote of
the chairman it was then decided to in
sert the word legal under the same cir.
cumstances. Why did they not then pro-
coed to ascertain who had received ma
jority Of illegal as well as legal votes,
and report that fact to the House! Only,
we suppose, because that "pungent word
forthwith was omitted.
This branch Of the report, we confess,
we feel much difficulty in preparing,
from an indisposition to say any thing
that might bear the appearance of wan,
Of a proper Difference for the opinions of
our colleagues and yet, we have SO lit
tie respect for the reasoning contained in
that report, that we scarcely know how
to characterize or treat it. We do not
mean to impeach their motives or intelli-
gence but, at the same time, we are
impelled to speak of it as the most ex-
traordnary document that has ever come
under our observation. Let us compare
the resolution of the House with the re-
report of the committee, and ascertain
whether the instructions therein contain
ed have been obeyed or disregarded.
By that resolution the committee were
instructed to report forthwith, which five
of the ten individuals claiming seats from
the State of New Jersey received the
greatest number of lawful votes, from
the VIII lie State, for Representatives in
the Congress of the United States, at the
election Of 1888 in said State, with all
the evidence of that fact in their posses.
sion: Provided, that nothing herein con.
tanned shall be SO construed as TO pre-.
vent or delay the action of the committee
in taking testimony, or deciding the said
case upon the merits of the election"
How has this position and absolute in.
struc.ion been fulfilled! Was there a
member Of the body that did not feel and
believe, on the introduction of the word
lawful, that was so s'renuously resisted,
that the whole objects Of the mover Of
the original resolution and his friends
been defeated Was there member of
the House who anticipated that within a
few days from that time, without the
examination of testimony, the committee
would report that all the votes given al
the election were lawful votes, because
they were enjoined to report forthwith,
when they were expressly required to
report who received the greatest number
Of lawful votes only, from the whole
State; and if there was no testimony
before the committee to enable them to
report forthwith, what they were repaired
to report, why did they not state that fact
to the House! Why did they not re-
port, that the testimony is incomplete,
and the parties to the contest are now, by
order of the committee, at home, taking
evidence to establish what you have in
structed us to report! Why did they
not give to that pungent word s forth
with, its plain, common sense meaning,
as soon as practicable, without unneces-
sary delay But, instead of that, it is
made TO control the whole resolution.
What says the report:
When the proposition to instruct
was originally introduced as an amend
ment to the application with which the
committee had come before the House,
its intent was clear that a report should
be Immediately made of the names of
those who had received the greatest
number of votes at the last Congressional
election in New Jersey. If any thing
more was wanting to explain the mean.
ing Of this proposition, i, is to be found
in the proviso which was added, and
which clearly indicated that the action
which the House was moved to demand
did not contemplate an interference with
the course adopted by the committee for
the taking of testimony, and deciding
the case upon the merits of the election
And, yet, when the resolution is so al
tered as to require the committee to report
upon the lawful votes only, it means pre-
cisely what was intended before the a.
mendment was adopted. Such course
of reasoning, we take for granted, cannot
be satisfactory, either 10 the House or the
country: