The Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [D.C.]) 1837-1845, 1841-01-09

seat for Mr. Ingersol although on that point he Mr.
r aid not speak positively. The COMMITTEE OF tlec-
lions went into the investigation of the subject and
,ok testimony: and the majority of the committee
10 the conclusion that fraud had been shown, and
recommended resolution for the adoption of this
House. setting forth that Mr. Naylor was duly elected
The minority of the committee also made report las
would be seen on reference to the documents, im-
pugning the validity Of Mr. MAYORS election; but II he,
Mr. F., remembered right not contending that there
was any evidence before the committee b. show that
Mr. Ingersol was elected. He MIR. f., therefore,
under such of facts considered the contest nov
In the same light as if the question had been raised
any other citizen of the State Of Pennsylvania; and
he willing give his vote that ground for the
right Of any citizen contest the seat OF any member
of this House Ii did not result matter of neces
sary consequence that the opposing candidate was 70
be the only cQRtestor to the right of the seq was
right which Belonged TO any citizen who thought Mr.
Naylor was not properly elected. The House, in his
view, was to act in judicial capacity-as court Of
justce-and the only question TO the mode IN which
this House would act, was question OF convenience
Ii had been found convenient and expedlent IN all
courts TO counsel both sides OF lgated questr MS
IL might not perhaps be an inherent right TO have
counsel; but il was convenient and expedient and Il
seemed him that the claim TO have them was as per
feet here il could be In court OF justice Here was
brought before the House for ito adjudication
and in his opinion Mr. Ingerso who had raised this
question: should be permitted to be heard as well as
Mr.. Naylor And il seemed to HIM, Mr.. F., that il
made difference whether the former claimed the seat
not The contest equally important TO the coun-
try; and the right Of the citizens to have the wrong
corrected, if wrong existed, was equally good lie
y should therefore vote against the reconsideration
Mr.. BRIGGS was understood TO say that he
thought the House had committed great error, at
the last session of Congress- in refusing the members
from New Jersey who claimed their seats opportu-
nifty of being heard at the bar of the House. Now,
here was case from the State of Pennsylvania, in
which Mr. lngersoll claimed that the electionof Mr.
NayIor was effected by fraud and that if justice were
done, the sitting member would be removed from his
seat. He (Mr. B knew of no case within the last
ten wears in which person claiming seat had not
been heard at the bar Of the House He thoushtlt
was the right of Mr.. Ingerso to be heard. There
was great propety in his being heard upon the ground
suggested by the gentleman from New York, Mr.
FlLLMoRE.) He (Mr. b. thorght that it would be
not only inexpedient, but manifestly UNJUST when
rival candidate here to contest the right OF man
who was in his seat and who claimed that rght--it
would he repeated, be most manifest injustice not to
hear him at the bar of the House. II was right that
the sitting member should also be heard He Mr. b.
hoped that the vote would not be reconsdered; and
that the House would do that justice in this case
which was refused to the five members from the State
of New Jersey.
The SPEAKER gave the floor to
Mr. MASON, of Ohia who yielded II to enable
Mr. GARRETT DAVIS to ask for the reading Of
the memorial of Mr.. Ingerso, (above referred to.)
The memorial not being at the moment on the Clerks
table
Mr. MASON considered the resolution offered by
his colleague Mr.. MedilD as very proper one. He
(Mr. Mason had entertained the same opinion at the
time the New Jersey before the House, and
he had then the honor of offering resolution of the
same import this but which under the influences
then prevaing,+ was rejected by an memorable ma
jority, some of whom were at this present moment
engaged in attempting to have the nestimable privi-
leges there claimed extended to ofther own friends
Where then was the desire of these gentlemen that
the parties coming here by virtue of documents emana
ting from the highest authority of the State should be
permitted to plead their at the bar of this House
He glad, however, to see returning sense OF JUS
tce as indicated by the resolution now proposed.
The unexamped outrage perpetraed in that case had
reached the of the People, and they had respond
ed to it in terms which ne hoped, would be remember
ed after the existence of the present Congress they
were now, he hoped, about to return to the good old
practices Of the Republican school, according to which,
as he had read and understood them, was the priv
ege Of person who had been returned to this House
as member, and of him who contested the validity
of the return the truth the election to appear at
the bar and be heard by himself his counsel TO
use the words of his resolution of the last ses
sion, which had been scowled down by fierce ma
jorty It was proper therefore, that the resolution
should have been adopted and he hoped that it would
not be rescinded
Il was proper, however, that the vote should be
considered for purposes of explanation. He wished
to know whether Mr.. Ingersol claimed seat in this
House by virtue of election by the people of Penn
sylvania He (Mr. M } suppos ID that it was with
view to ascertain that fact that the reading of the me-
mortal had been called for. For his own part, he
would give counsel not only to the contesting mem
Der but to the humblest of the constituency who had
given vote and who believed that the election had
not been rightfuy achieved He wished this House
10 be considered great court Of Justice well as the
grand inquest of the nation and that the great rules
Of right should not be turned aside to political
objects on party purposes. Some atonement was due
TO the Constitution and the violated privileges of
this House, and he hoped it would now be made, and
that those who might hereafter be in majority IN this
House would avoid, as contamination, the precedent
which had been set at the last session of Congress.
Mr. CUSHING said he was in favor of hearing
the petitioner according to the motion made by the
gentleman from Ohio, Mr.. Medill) He (Mr. CD
was in favor of that motion for the reasons already
submitted by other gentlemen and for this further rea-
SON. On referring to the record he found that all the
proceedings in this based upon petition of
Mr. Inperso The petition set forth that he was
duly elected and he claimed the seat to which he said
he was duly elected, against Mr.. Nayor-the re
turned and sitting member. That was the record
These proceedings were in continuation of that re-
cord The question before the House was, what dis
position should be made of that petition of Mr. lnge
soil And upon that petition, (record as it was) and
upon the usage of the House, he (Mr. CD thought
that Mr. lngerso was, in justice and IN equity, emit
tied to be heard.
He objected however TO the form of the resolution,
and he asked the attention of the gentleman from
Ohio mr. Medil) to it. 1t was unusual IN its terms,
and there was one expression to which ne Mr. %
objected The resolution was the effect Che did not
recoIect the precise words that Mr. IngersOll should
have leave to be heard well the sitting member
Now, Mr. Naylor was member of this House, de
facto at least, as the gentleman from Ohio admitted
he (Mr CT said member de jurej but, at all events
Mr.. Naylor was member de faco, and therefore, as
such he had as much right to speak as the gentleman
from Ohio OF as he MIR. @. himself had and it did
not need resolution of this House to give that right
The very mention in the resolution Of leave to speak
was a denial Of his right to speak. He wished the
gentleman would modify the terms Of his resolution:
They were unusual, contrary to precedent, and, IN
words and in spirit, denial of the unquestionabe
right of the sitting member
Mr. MEDILL did not think that the resolution
contained any such denial 1t only provided that the
petitioner should be placed on the same footing with
Mr. Nayor; and he did not therefore, see the neces-
sity Of the modification suggested. He hoped Mr. In
eersoII would be permitted TO go on