Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1843-12-09

II the States from which they came, and to this HOUSE
and its proceedings in the choice of Speaker; and fur
TIER because il had been placed upon the records Of
the House by trick of legislation
Mr.. HUNT of New York said it was no. without ex.
IRENE reluctance that he rose but, Of those
whose name attached 10 the paper often alluded
to in the present debate he felt called upon to VIndcats
himself and the other sgners from the charge OF ioe-
aity which had been freely cast upon them by gen.
temen in various quarters Of the House. Ii was no,
his purpt al this time into discussion OF The
merits of the general question: but to speak for one
moment in exposition OF the motives OF the minority.
In what aspect did the subject present t'ef before the
| House. How that House organized: The mrnl-
bers who composed t held their seats under law of
Congress of 1871 which provided that all the States
should elect delegates t, Congress by districts That
| law he held to be conformity with the Constitution,
which instrument conferred Congress full power TO
pass such law II had been the pleasure Of four
of the twenty-six States of this Union TO return Re-
representatives. t, this House in disregard of such a
law and it the opinion oil those who signed
the paper in question that such returns were in utter
disregard of both law and the Constitution What
could gentlemen expect from minority holding firmly
such conviction? To sit timely by VIII lie they took
their seats members of this House under illegal
return, and that without word OF remonslrance or
protest? Surely The minority felt it 10 be their
solemn incumbent duty TO give some expression Of
their dissent, and The mode in which they had attemp
ed 10 DO this, so far from being justly charged with ii
berality and want OF respect, was, in his Judgment
characterized by moderation, liberay, and sincere
desire 10 avoid all steps that Int create disturbance
in the preliminary organization Of the House MIR. H.
would not enter on the merits of the question; that
must be reserved for discussion hereafter. He had
risen simply to repel the nsnnations which had been
SO freely cast upon himself and his assocetas
| A word as TO the question now before the House
lie held II TO be the right of the minority, placed
they were that il should appear upon the jour
mails of the House-that al every stage OF what they
deemed unlawful and unconstitutional procedure,
they had opposed it, demonstrated against IT, and OBJ
ecled to- and protested against it, Dad the consequen
ces of The admission of gentlemen chosen, end with
the organization Of this House, MIR. Ii. should not
have offered word Of remark. But when he looked
al the magnitude of The results involved, their influence
upon the future character of that House, and the
rightiu power and supremacy of this Government,
founded on and regulated by the Constitution, the sub
ject TO a magnitude, which he could not disguise
from his mind, ard the sense OF which, he here
avowed the motive of his course, on this OCCASION
He hoped the rights OF the minority, would be treated
by the majority at least with some respect.
Mr. BEARDSLEY. The Constitution decl,red that
each House of Congress-and therefore, this House
shou keep journal of III proceedings; that is, should
record, matter Of history, all that was done by the
House. His colleague from New York (Nlr. Barnard)
had presented certain resolution, which had been
partly read, and considered virtually having been
read, and the Clerk had inserted it entire upon The
journal. A motion made 10 correct the jour
nal by striking out the resouon and it was argued in
favor Of the motion that the resolution was OF cha
insult ible be recorded, because II was cisre
spectful the whole House, and especially 10 certain
members thereof ii seemed to Mr. B. that this not
the mode in which to decide whether that resolution
dsrespecfu not The Journal was 10 stat what
the House had done; and The House had received re-
solution which d,srespec,ful any gentleman might
introduce motion saying So and putting that as rea
why il ought not TO be receved and MIR. b. would
not say that, such motion made IN reference t,
this paper but he might vote in its favor But the dsfe
spectu character OF the paper was no valid reason Tor
motion 10 correct tie journal The resolution, be lis
character what it might, had been received without
dissent OF objection, and this what the journal
stated No motion had been made that the resolution
be returned 10 the mover, that II was such reso'u
ton as the House could not entertain. The motion
now to correct the Journal but Mr.. b could not
see how, unless some such motion had been made
The record must tell what was done. Mr. d. did not
suppose that the receiving this resolution, reading
it, al oil committed the House 10 an approval of what
il contained. No such thing was implied As TO the
matter contained in the paper, they in the most
unqualified manner against Mr.. g own sentiments
He had made up opinion on the case, which he
would at The right time state and endeavor to support
lie belle we'd, for his part, that the gentlemen re-
ferred 10 were as lawfully here, under the Constitution,
any other members. He regarded the act directing
the dstrictng of the States utterly nugatory, void
and Of no binding effect
But receiving paper which expressed the opposite
opinion in nowise committed the House. Surely no.
thing was more than the receiving and reading
what the House rejected and disapproved Ten thou
sand instances Of this constantly occurring lie
therefore considered the objection OF gentlemen against
the papers appearing the journal as putting the
sanction Of the House to one sided view al the ques
ton us of no weight II was the duty oil The House
record whit il had done yesterday; that was what
the journal did. Should motion now be made to
return the paper 10 the mover or to e5Punse from
the record as indecent and dsrespectiu TO The House,
tina, would raise the direct question on which the
House could vote. He must say, that, understand
ing the proceedings as he did, he could net see now
The journal could have been otherwise made up and
under THIS impression, he should vote against The me
ton.
MIR. STILES, of Georgia, thought this question had
occuped more of the time OF the House than II ought,
or than any one could have anticipated lie should
be at loss 10 account for this, bu; for that part OF the
paper of the gentleman from New York and his friends
which DEE Jared their intention not TO fail IN any ell
fort TO exclude those members who were here by on
election on general ticket. What was the question
which d. iyed the House? Was il whether any and
every paper which any gentleman here proposed to
read must therefore be put upon the minutes was
there any such rule, 1t net pretended. The very
idea was prepnsterous. What! because member rose
and merely proposed to read paper which he did
not read that that paper be it what 1t might, must 60
al length upon the Journal If there was no rule
which required this where the authority TO justify
IT. Gentlemen founded themselves the declaration
in the Constitution that each House must keep jour
nal Of its proceedings; but Mr.. would ask whether
The Journal must declare that the gentleman from New
York wished OF attempted 10 read CERTAIN paper =
Did the gentleman read it: No lie proPos to do so,
but was refused leave. Was the proposal the aetua
Performance Are these and tie same What
were the "proceedngs" of the House, Net merely the
proposals OF the House, of any me mber of The House,
bu, lis actual doIngs.
The House never heard this paper, or knew ct the
time lis contents, yet this was now d'gnhed by
place upon the Journal The resolution offered by the
gentleman showed no than his intent on to read
certain paper, and far it true; but when the
resolution went detail the contents OF that paper
at length, it related TO what part OF the pro-
ceednes Of The House, and far il incorrect; AID
being incorrect and no Fart Of the proceedings had
no right 10 be upon the Journal Bot, Independent OF
this there were things inherent in the paper itself
" hch ought 10 exclude it from the Journal. It rrpgu
Iarly and improperly undertook 10 anticipate duty
which belonged to the Committee of Elections IL was
the province and the duty of that committee to report
on the certificates of disputed elections The course OF
The House in The matter was perfectly plain II the
tenure by which any gentleman held his seat was al
legged TO be improper let the case 60 to the proper the