The daily union., 1856-03-26
CONGRESSIONAL.
SPEECH OF HON. A. II. STEPHENS,
or GEORGIA

| or GEORGIA
Delivered in the House Of Representatives March H. 1856
The resolution from the Committee of Elections asking
for power to send for and papers in the
election case being before the House for consideration
Mr. STEPHENS said: f..
Mr. SPEAKER IL s not my desire to prolong this debate
nor do expect to any points on the merits OF
the question before the House WISH and intend only in
what have TO say to enlarge upon and enforce OF
the points made in the minority report on your table
wish too in what have TO say have the ear OF the
House rather than the of the country; that do
not want the country TO hear what saw but nv main OBJ
ec is to address myself this morning particularly espe-
ciay and emphatca to the attention of the House. and
upon the questions before These sir grave ques-
TONS They are questions Involving principles of the first
magnitnde they are questions OF judicial well po-
tica character Of the highest order above the small
consideration OF which OF two shall have seat del
egaie here In deciding them, sit not as Legislators
but as judges. Our decision upon this resolution what
everit may be, will be important precedent in the f-
ture history OF this country. We should therefore not
act without due deberauon, careful reflection and full
understanding OF the principles involved and we should
also be stripped far possible of all party bias and all
political prejudice.
The proposition before Of unusual character
1t for this House TO exercise of its extraordinary pow
ershat is the power to send for persons and papers
before us sitting court judging of the qua6ca-
tons election and return of one who occupies
terri oria delegate upon this floor Now, sir do not
question the power Of the House to exercise the authority
invoked. The gentleman my right from Pennsy lvania,
Mr. KuHKEL in his remarks yesterday spoke as if he
thought those OF us who oppose the resolution pend
ing denied the power to send for persons and papers
in of contested elections and he cited cases in
which it has been done On this point | wish to be
distinctly understood | do not deny the power in
a proper case though no instance of its exercise
has occurred since the act of Congress of 1851 regulating
the mode OF taking testimony in of contests for seats
here and no case need ever occur far as
long as that law remains the statuebook. Its pro-
visions full and ample. But should the occur
where may be necessary in order TO get proper and
petent testimony TO establish any fact that the House
egtmately and properly inquire into in such investga-
tons, send for persons and papers, do not question
their power to do it. What maintain is that the power
be ghtuy exercised only when it is done to procure
testimony which is in itself relevant pertinent, competent
and admissible to prove such facts the House prop
ery consider and look into. Nor do wish to be under
stood being inclined in the slightest degree to oppose
investigation in this case to the fullest extent that be
properly gone into by Within these limits am in favor
of the House taking the widest range and greatest latitude
of investigation. But is the question before such one
would allow hearing of the testimony sought to be
obtained it at hand think it is not 1t is
to this point now speak.
What sir is the character of the testimony which is
asked to be sent for2 And what the object of if OBJ
tanned? St the whole matter-get rid of the rubbish
go through both reports and does not the real gst of this
application amount TO this The nemoralis wishes wit
for prove the npady of the law of Terri
tory of the United States under which sitting delegate
elected the ground that the members OF the egsa-
tive assembly of that Territory which passed it
properly and legally elected Is not this fair statement
of the proposition it stands before US 1t to
get this clear view Of its merits before the House that
moved when it here before TO refer the proposition
10 tue have their reasons ana grounds
for making treported TO the House We have their
reasons; now kUDw what is their object; and have
not stated il fully fairyH Then sir is the testimony
competent if il were here Mark YOU we sit as court
Would ii be admissible in the trial of any in any
court-in criminal case, for nsance-o permit party
to offer evidence to impeach the validity Of the law under
which the accused arrngned by showing that the leg
sature that passed the law not properly elected and
legally consti,uteda The validity of law may be inquired
into and judged of by court on some grounds which
might be stated The constutionality of Inv may be-
! decided uDOn--that |
this ground The rules governing all courts in passing
upon laws and constituting statutes need not here state
But court in Judging Of the Uddty Of statute any
Of the grounds they take cognzance Of will allow
inquiry into the legality of the election of the members
the legislature that passed it, No be found Of this
character in the whole history Of civil Jurisprudence.
The reason courts of law will not allow such in.
qures be made before them is that the decision of al
such questions properly belongs to another tribuna-tc
the houses respectively, Of the law-makng power itself
and their decision, when made is considered as the judg
ment Of court Of competent juriSdicon which other
court will inquire into And this House, sitting n court
does cannot inquire into any fact invaldating
impeachng the validity Of any law either Of the United
States State Territory, which any other court could
not inquire into. assert this principle that cannot
be successfully assaed call upon gentlemen who occu
py contrary position to show Gaze il they can, in this
any other country, where the validity of law in any
court Of justice allowed to be mpeached by in
qurng into the legality Of the election OF the members
the legislature that passed it. That Is what we now
called upon TO do and that is what assert have
right to do Why sir, 1t is fundamental maxim OF the
/
by Sir William Blackstone and enforced by every writer
on the subject both English and American that is in
heren right of the High Court of Parianen-rom which
as a model all legislative, parliamentary bodies have
sprungo settle for itself all questions touching its
organization and when such questions thus settled
| they cannot be inquired into elsewhere
What is the question before us2 Under that clause
of the constitution which TO this House the right
and power Judge Of the qualifications elections, and
turns Of those who may be entitled TO hold seats this
floor have brought 10 consideration the right o
the sitting OF the sitting delegate OF the Territory Of Kan
Into his qualifications, election, and return have
full power 60 and 10 determine AN questions pertaining
either his qualifications hs election, return. But in
doing this asked to take step further, and tc
Judge not only Of his election return and qualifications
but to go into investigation and Judge of the qualhcd
ons elections and returns OF the members Of the legisla
tive assembly Of Kansas which passed the law under
which il Is admitted he was elected say sir according
to the principle which have laid down. in the
parliamentary history Of England, from which oil our in
suons have sprung or in this country can be adduced
to justify warrant il beg leave to call attention &c
some authority on this point read from Sir Edward
Coke "a Inst, p l5) In speaking Of the High Court o.
/ Parliament he says:
"And every court Of justice hath laws and customs fol
II direction by the law by the civil
law, by peculiar laws and customs, &c, 50 ~
High Court Of Parliament proriist eORsuetadtHi
bus subsisiit. IL s Ter t conSUsfudo parliament.
And THIS Is the reason that eJudges ought not 70 gv
opinion OF the matter Of Parliament because II Is not
be decided by the laws but socund tsgcm cf
sstHdtHep partlameH and so the judges in divers Para
ments have confessed"
o. any matter relating to the constitution organization
rgh privileges of the members Of the House OF Lord
the Commons cannot interfere In like matters relating
to the organization Of the House Of Commons, the Lord
cannot interfere. No other court in the kingdom can in
erfere The highest Of the roanlthe King will
the preroEaves of the Crown-cannot interfere On nj