The Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1837-1845, 1844-01-26
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
THURSDAY, January 25, lS

THURSDAY, january 70, 1914
Prayer by the Rev. Mr.. TINsLEY.
The Clerk then read the journal of yesterday
when
MIR. ELMER, from the Committee of Elections
made report on the memorial Of William l.. Cog
gin, 0sntesting the seat of Thomas W. Giimer, and
informed the House that the report would have
been made earlier, but that they had been waiting
for the minority also to report and moved that the
report be Printed and referred to Committee of the
Whole House.
Mr.. NEWTON moved to separate the motion to
refer and print that the vote might be taken sepa-
rately.
The SPEAKER then stated the question Of refe-
renee, which was agreed to-
The question then REQUIRED on printing, when
Mr. ELMER stated that when the committee was
ready 10 report, some days ago, the memorial Of
Mr.. Goggin, Mr. Gilmer claimed the time allowed
to reply, which granted He made that reply
within the time allowed, which was now before the
House; also the argument of MIR. Goggin.
Mr.. NEWTON rose and objected to the printing
of the statement of Mr.. Goggn, because that state
ment now d. not cover the ground it did
at the time he submitted it. Mr. Goggin was
absent now al home from ndispositlon, and he pro-
tested against the printing of his statement, which
calculated to place him falsely before the
try, because other evidence had been submitted to
the committee which materially changed the issue al
The time he made his statement
Mr.. DOUGLASS said that, at the time the state
ments were made an agreement had been made be-
tween the parties that they would controvert
tain facts but as to others which might arise they
would be answered by submitting argument in the
He differed from the gentleman from Vir.
gnla, Mr.. Newton because he conceived that al
though Mr.. Goggln absent from ndisposition, it
would be uncourteous to that gentleman to withhold
his printed argument, which he conceived to be a
part OF the report itself.
Mr.. SCHENCk said he was opposed to print
ing the Arguments, because the document was vo-
luminous, and nothing was 10 be gained to the
try, and that the minority and sjority reports con-
tanned the same matters Of fact; and the only differ
ence that existed only 10 the propriety Of
ir.atng the statements, and the certificates of the
clerks of elections. Nothing would be gained BY
tbs course, except by the public printer who had
the JOB.
Mr.. HAMLlN said he anticipated the opposition
which had been made TO the printing Of the argu-
ments Of Messrs. Goggn and Gilmer because he had
been told out OF doors, that such would be the
Mr.. Goggin came here with a memorial which had
been presented and referred TO the Committee on
Elections and printed, and it bat fair that the
st-:omens made on both sides should be printed be-
cause they contained evidence not stated in the me.
mortal Of NJ. Goggin. II had been stated on the
other side that they contained additional evidence
and should not be printed, but they do contain add
tonal evidence, and should be printed together Let
the country have the issues made up by the parties
themselves, then there could be no complaint.
Mr.. GlLMER said that, during the lime he hac
occupied his seat, doubt TO which he had never en-
ject; out, IN yIndlcaon OF his honorable competitor
lie thought his friends dong him Injustice by
opposing the printing of his statement His COLLEAGUE
from the Northern Neck district (Alr Newton bad
presented the memorial OF his honorable competitor
which had been prepared at leisure during which
time he had not been heard But before the commit
tee they had both preferred arguments which were
now before the House, and the friends OF
his competitor opposed to their being printed
with the report They should have thought Of that
objection In the committee, before the report had
been presented to the House, and he hoped they
would consent TO the printing of his honorable com.
petitor's statement, and do him Justice As a marty
10 the contest he hoped they would do him The JUS
tice by printing his statement well as that of his
competitor His colleague had spoken of economy
and asked the Clerk TO ho'd up the document 10 The
gaze of members, TO intmidae them and preyent The
statements from being printed. lie MIR G y was an
economist, and admired economy as virtue in botb
public and private life, and priced 1t as a rare virtue
As TO economy, his colleagues speech would eos,
than the printing his statement and that Of hi,
competitor. II that was all they wished he MIR G
would pay for the printing himself. If economy wa
their aim, that should not obsruc them in the publi
cation Of both statements. The objection as TO eco
nonly, should have been made in Committee and moi
here. 1t is too late TO raise that objection. All
he wanted was, 10 pin down his competitor 10 bi.
argument, prepared after due elaboration and if il
enured TO his benefit it no fault Of his
Mr.. DROMGOOLE said, he had understood. al.
tons had made report in the Of Mcssrs Goggip
and Gilmer.
Mr.. sCHENCK said il made by majority OF
the committee
Mr.. DROMGOOLE said that he had stated tina,
the Committee OF Elections had made a reoort
which was m a parliamentary view q fact because
there is no such thing known a minority repor,
except by the courtesy Of the House which had be
come, by long course Of parliamentary lIberaIity
custom not right; and the correction Of the gen
nd i'm IN ne as
has always been considered the committee and mo-
the minority, which could not make a report witbou
the consent OF the House The only way. and m,
proper way, for minority % meet all issues excep
where the consent of the House is given to make
written statement, ~ by argument, and 10 ak IN,
House TO reverse the judgment of the committee -
This was the only parliamentary right minority had
yet, by the consent of the House, they could make
written argument; therefore he should vote for tn
printing Of both statements.
Mr. DAVIS, of Kentucky opposed the printin,
Of the statement OF MIR. Goggn, because new i
sues had been created by additional evidence which
had been furnished since Mr. Goggn had made hi
statement, and during his absence No objection wa
urged to the printing Of Mr.. Gilmer's statement
but to the printing of Mr.. Goggin's The gentlemar
from Virginia (Mr. Dromgoole) had said that mi
norlty could not make report. Has the minorit,
rights
Mr.. DROMGOOLE said he had expressly stated
that minority could not, according 10 the parliament
tary iaw make rePorteNcepi Dy the consent OF the
House, but that they could, by argument ask the
House to the decision of the committee and
ne asked the gentleman from Kentucky if such was
not the facti
Mr. DAVIS nodded assent
But that gentleman had changed his pbrsseology q
little to suit bis purpose, to make 1T appear that
he had said that the minority had rights He said
no such thns.
Mr. DAVIS continued in defence Of the rights Of
the minority, and commended that the minority could
make report, because custom bad made II a right