The Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1837-1845, 1840-03-19

acts of the grossest Hy"o"ee, '"a' "''.
achareed the majority OF the committee WIN
,,f,.siae TO consider these depositions,"-
meaning the dispositions IN reference TO Soutb
Amboy. He then says, "Sir, ask II these
cbarges are founded IN ruth was no part
If The DISPOSITIONS taken by the certificate
claimants in relation 10 the election al South
Amboy. read aud considered IN committee
Nav. further: were not all the dispositions re-
lnti..g to that inquiry and which were IN pos
session of the committee mhen the report was
directed to be drawn, read and acted on r.
Now, sir, if this insinuation by nterroga-
ton is intended to convey the idea, that al the
time that the Committee agreed upon Inc
manner of making that report, that evidence ~
relation 10 South Ainboy,wu " read and acted
on" then | say it is not true. II it means that
more than twenty days before, that evidence
had been read, or considered as read by the
Committee, with the view OF determining up
on its competency merely, then 1t is true. lear
most readers would give it the former con-
struction but the gentleman may have IN
tended the latter If this statement of fact
contains "a charge of The grossest Injustice
against the majority Of the Committee-why
then, there il stands make no charges
those are the facts, as understand them, and
will in moment submit the proof. But,
say now, and repeat il distinctly and unequivo-
cally, that that evidence was not read or con-
sidered by the Committee at all in reference
to the report which they made to this House
that it was never read or considered by the
Committee for any purpose, after the resolution
of this House OF the 2Sth OF February, directing
the Committee to report on the larfM rotes,
nor for twenty days previous TO that time, and
then only with view of determining upon its
competency, and not for the purpose Of seeing
what it proved, or how much. And il a d.
rect refusal I" 10 iake up' this evidence by the
Committee, when they first met under the re-
solution Of the 2Sth Of February, to consider
Of the manner Of complying with that resolu-
ton, or direct refusal to permit the sealed
package to be sent to the Speaker TO be open
ed, that the Committee might consider Of the
evid nee it contained, is a" charge Of seeking
to suppress this eridence by numerical strength.
then must plead guilty to the offence of max
ing that charge, for state those facts, and will
presently submit the proof; but if such facts
bear no such construction, then am innocent
Of any such offence.
Now, sir, for the proof Of the facts which
| have asserted
First, then, that the majority Of the Com
mittee expressly refused /" 10 take up this eci-
dence" when they directed the manner OF max
ing that report. When the COMMITTEE met
on the morning of the 10th of February, to
comply with the resolution Of the House
the day before, resolution was moved in the
Committee, directing the Chairman to prepare
i
to amend that resolution by striking om all
after the word g Resolred," and inserting
substitute. So that had my substitute been
adopted, it would have read a, follows:
Resoircd, That This Committee, in obedience to
the resolution Of the House adopted yesterday, will
orthtrh proceed take up the evidence before the
Committee to ascertain which FIVE Of the ndiv-
duas claiming seats from the Stale Of New Jersey re-
ceved the greatest number Of lairfM votes from the
whole State for Representatives in the Congress Of the
United States at the election Of 1888 in sad State
This proposition was rejected by the follow
ing vote
AYES. Messrs Fillmore, Crslb and Smith,
Noes, Messrs. Rves, Medi, Brown, and Fisher a .
This, then, is the evidence from the journal
Of that committee. showing the express refu-
sal of the majority to consider that evidence
at that time.
Then the question required on the original
proposition to which mine was offered as an
amendment by way of substitute. The origi-
nal resolution as finally adopted was in the
following words:
Resoiued, That the Chairman pre- pare report in
pursuance OF the House resolution Of Yesterday and
that in doing so he take and consider the votes ad-
Judged to have been given 10 the several Claimants
by the Governor and Privy Council OF New Jersey,
III
of The townships of Milville. in Cumberland county,
and South Amboy, in Middesex county, 10 the
clerks of said counties respectively as having been
poed in said townships, as The number of LAWFUL
VOTES gircn IN The said State.
On this resolution the vote was as follows
Aycs-Messrs. Rives, Medill, Brown, and Fisher
A.
Nocs-Messrs Fillmore, Crabb, and Smith,.
But before the vote was taken upon it, Mr.
GRADE moved to amend it by adding at The
end after the word Estate" the following
words
Deducting such votes as the evidence referred by
the House TO this Committee, may show 10 b. u,iac-
fi rites have been polled inconsistency with the
election laws OF such Stale"
On this amendment the vote was as fol.
lows:
Ayes- Messrs Fillmore, Crabb and Smith
Massachusetts, Rives, Medill, Brown and Fisher.
So here again this same majority refused to
direct the Chairman in drawing up his report
to deduct such unlawful potes, as the evidence
referred to the committee might show Thus
1t will be seen that, by rejecting the first pro-
position submitted by me, the committee re-
fused "to take up" aud consider the evidence
itself, and by the rejection Of the proposition
Of Mr.. CRAZE, they refused TO direct the
Chairman TO consider it in making his report
They then adopted the original resolution by
the vote which have already I'd, and il was
under that resolution that the report was
drawn up by the Chairman. And even that,