Demoine courier., 1855-03-01

accomplishing their object in one day,
will it be cootended tina, they must adj
|journ sine die, and issue another call for
another convention? Must another res
olution be passed by one house and a.
greed to by the other, before they can
meet lawfully. Who SO silly, or who
has so little respec.for his own judgment
as 10 argue.
1t is contended that the members Of
the Senate must march into the Hall Of
the House in a formal manner, headed
by their President, 10 render the pro-
ceedings valid. If this argument were
worth anything, its efficacy is destroyed
by those who use it, from the fact, that
they violated it themselves. On the dsy
before the election took place, when the
Joint Convention had been in session
during the forenoon, and adjourned until
two o'clock, the members Of the Senate
came into the House, informally, and
took their seats, and during that sitting,
two Supreme Judges, Geo. G. Wrigh,
and VIM. Woodward were elected
Their certificates made out and signed
by a democratic President. and acquies.
ed in by every democratic member pres.
ent. Yet the next day it was illegal
the Senators who come in were denoun
ced as interlopers, revolulionis,s. One
nights sleep, or debauch, or drilling, we
don't know which, had wrought a won.
derful change on the sp;ri, of their dreams.
Verify, the showing up Of the deep dam
nation is enough to sicken homes, mems
minds. One member of the House,
acknowledged 10 a friend, tina, he was
doing wrong, but said that the party had
ordered it, and he must obey. ~
Of all the Locotoco prints in the
State; that uphold and endorse the action
the l~ocofoco members ofthe Legislature,
and seek to impress upon the minds OF its
readers that the election of Harlan was
illegal. the State Gazette stands fore.
most. A few extracts from that paper
may not be amiss, TO show into what
depths il, is driven to find something
whereon to hang an argument.
In that paper of the 2Oth Of January,
we find the following:
"The Senate had a right to postpone
its action until Monday, as i, had never
agreed TO 60 into join, convention on
Saturday, and the majority Of the House
acted with cowardly precipi,ancy in
forming themselves into a selfs'yled con.
v~ention, and thereby enabling themselves
to do in the absence of the Senate, wha.
they could no, have done had the Senate
been present."
There is not one word Of truth in The
above sentence. In the first place, the
Senate had no right to endeavor to defea,
the action of the joint convention by adj
journing over until Monday.
2. 1t had agreed the evening before,
when acting with the House, by a large
majority, to 60 into joint convention on
Saturday morning at ten o'clock. 3D..
The majority of the House did not act
with the least preeipitancy in going into
joint convention. because they had been
laboring for three weeks 10 elect and
had not succeeded until that day. Was
that hasty legislation? 4th. "To Dc in
the absence of the Senate what they
could not do have done had the Senate
been present." Now. Mr.. Editor, you
must either have been drunk, or wilfnlly
trying 10 misinform your readers. when
you penned those words. You know
very well that if the Senate had been
present-eyery member of them-lhat
the result would have been the same
you know very well tina, James Harlan
received SO votes, a majority of the whole
number Of members elected-you know
that the Legislature was composed of
l0l members, and tha, So are a majority
of that number, and you know tina. a
majority elects; for what then do you
make such assertions as above? Are you
so lost TO honor tina. you pervert the
truth for party purposes? Have you
drank SO long in the political dregs of
locofocoism that you n discern the
truth from t%alsehood!
Again, the Eddyville Free Press, an
Independent pepper, speaks of the matter
as follows:
at was o part of the sworn duty OF
every member of the Senate and House
to meet in joint convention, and by a
joint vote select these officers. No mem.
Der of the Senate or House either has a
right TO evade this duty by any sub,er.
fuge whatever. A bad man may be cho.
sen by the majority, but :hey must an
swer to their constituents for that. Ii lie
no par, of the duty of any member 10 try
to. defeat the will of the majority by re-
fusing , o do his own duty. 1t is always
right TO try to change the will Of the
majority, bu, it is never right to thwart
it by the violation of our own duty.
These are some os the reasons why
we think the majority in the Senate were
the first to transgress. We regard their
course as a high handed disregard of
duty, a course al war with the whole
tonnr If oup ipstitutions n courca uhich