Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1855-08-10

cate That | have taken my seat. l
will not discuss the right of this
House to go behind the certificate
| will merely say no such right is
given by the act none is implied
in 1t. But, sir, | am willing-for
arguments sake-to admit that this
House has the right to go behind
the certificate and investigate the
legality of tho election that does
not tresspass any powers of the Ex-
ecutive but, sir, the moment this
body goes behind the election, and
assumes the right to dictate in ref
erence to calling such election; the
right to nullify the calling of such
election; the right to investigate
the former election, already set a.
side the right TO decide upon va
cancies the right to dictate the
form of returns, to admit persons
voted for at prior election, and, in
fact, the right to countermand all
the acts of the Governor, and legis-
leto ia an ca f'~es facfn manner that
moment it supercedes its legitimate
power, usurps that vested in the
Executive by the organic act, in
validates its own organization and
destroys its own legal existence.
But it is claimed that old estab-
lished customs, that Parliamentary
rules, give this House power to go
behind the May election. With
some, the almost automatic truth,
that all legislative bodies have the
power to decide upon the election
and qualification of its own MEM
bers, is all-powerful, all-meaning,-
in it is all power. Now, sir, | have
as deep a reverence for old estab-
lishcd customs as any one I be-
lieve | am as strongly opposed to
departing from the requisition of
Constitutions under which live, as
any one-but | am very careful to
keep in view, and rightly to under
stand, those customs and constitu-
tons | wish not to reverence inn
aginary gods.
| believe parliamentary rules
make it the duty of legislative boz
dies before proceeding to business,
to ascertain who are duly elected
by examining into the credentials
it is their province to examine into
the authenticity of the credentials,
not the legality of the elections
Parliamentary rules only regulate
the proceedings of a body-their
manner of conducting business
Parliamentary rules cannot legalize
a members right TO a sea they
cannot give this body any power to
do this they cannot interfere with
the organic act. They cannot at
the most give any further power
than to examine into the returns of
the last election. And l believe,
sir, they cannot give that right
Parliamentary rules are for delibera-
tive bodies. They are for the gov
eminent of conventions, but when
in force over legislative bodies they
pre-suppose those bodies existing
under constitutions, and that those
constitutions guarantee all rights,
and define all duties of the bodies
hence no parliamentary rules can
give legislative powers to this House.
All power comes from the organic
act, but rules of proceedings may
come from parliamentary usage. l
make a wide distinction.
But it is urged that in the sever
al States the Legislatures are the
tribunals before which elections are
tested-that the two Houses Of
Congress test the election of their
members.
But is there any one so blind as
to believe that constitutional provis-
ions made expressly for and having
reference to Congress only, have a
ny authority over this or any other
territory in their territorial capacity ?
The constitution of the United
States decides how the election of
our territorial delegate shall be de-
cided, but it only has bearing upon
members of the two Houses of Con-
gress. am aware that the consti-
tutions OF the several States ma ke
the several legislative bodies the tri-
bunal before which to test the le-
gality OF the election. But let us
contrast this case with those of the
States aud of Congress. Members
elected to the two houses of Con-
gress come forward with their Gre
dentiaIs, and the constitution ex-
pressly declares that the respective
Houses shall decide upon them.
In the several States there is no
tribune except the Legislature itself
to declare members elected-the
Governor has no power given him
to do it--there it is a constitutional
provision that each House shall be
the judge of the election of its
members. But there is no similar
ity between that case and this the
constitutional enactments of one
State have no bearing upon the ac-
tons of another. But it is said
that presidents have been establish.
ed by which this decision must be
governed. | have not been able,
sir, to find a precedent. No decis-
ion can be a precedent unless the
facts upon which such decision was
founded be similar to those in this
instance and no case can be similar,
unless it be that arising in the first
Territorial Legislature, constituted
by an act of Congress similar to this.