The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1857-01-13

ing they must destroy it by soma solemn act done either
In the presence of the joint conveno or done elsewhere,
and for may notified 1t. This, understand was not
done Noresouton of the senate was esr sent to the
house saying this convention is at an end NO reso-
ton of that kind passed in the presence OF the Joint
con yenOn TIE houses met together as JonS con-
yeution adjourned. They adjourned not as separate
bodies but body-as joint convention When tue
hour arrived for their reassembng they were IN contem
platon Of law reaseemblei.
One idea further sir We shall very be called upon
coordinate branch OF the national Legislature TO meet
the other house of Congress to count the electoral votes
for President of the United States II is solemn act re-
quired by the constitution. When the time comes
shall be compelled go but technically there Is MOTH
ing in the constitution requiring to stay there when we
go. Suppose majority of the Senate should accident
ally absent themselves purposely walk out; would nat
destroy the validity Of the couut2 suppose 1t does not
happen be done in the presence OF majority OF the Sen
ate 10 not the count a good one
Mr. BUTLER will ask my friend one question on that
point; it has occurred TO me in thinking on this sub
e suppose question should arise in the joint assem-
bly of the t bofes of Congress- counting the cleo
toral votes and ths Senate should take view OF the
dity of yoe and The House vf Representatives should
taks different view wooa not ine senate nave 'ne shs
to re- ire and dslibsratef ~. ,,
Mr.. BROWN Ungusstionsb'y. They would have
right go out in body t oe ~ ume my ana J.
could not go out bis hGsf, saa on NINE ana 80
en- until there was majority leE Inc Senate Is mere
the Constitution requires it to be here aIa must mot W
any where else -.
Now for what purpose was the of Iowa required
10 be present in Joint convention with the house OF repre-
sentaa-es7 Was it that majsry Of the senate snouia
For what purpose do gentlemen insist that there as he
cessy absolute majority OF the ndivdaa memoers
the sehate to be thereY Was t,hat q men
should vote for tc who should be electedf Certpy
not because though he might get minority OF he senate
If be got larger majority OF hc house ot repretnauVes
so that counting the aggregate yot ne ssu ,ha ct
the whole he elected senator. understand tRe iact
be- that there fifteen senators present ana sAe
absent Suppose the sixteen had been there was nse
csry TO the validity of the election that one or more OF ne
should tcte for the sitting member? If they had been
there and had voted against him. it would not have
changed the result Then for what purpose Is ~ insisted
ton BECAUSE the election is binding without their peng
there and whether they voted for him or against MN do
affect the result id sqy maaner shape gr .na
half dozen Others of U.S. not elected Ihen they were
there simply as witnesses OF the pfoceedingssmpy as
witnesses OF the election not taking any part Ia ~ which
was to affect the res1t one way or the other. !.
hold that if it not legally necessaryH ~ was no'
necessary under the consution-for them 70 De
in order TO do something which should make an act on
ing make void there would be no legal necessity 'o
their being present ALL 1t were necessary 10 tue va
lidy of the election las gentlemen nav saa, anu n
would that it should be the case thata majority o 'ne
Of each house should vote in favor OF the same
rse that to that ne should se. na u uae
iorty of the senate sr else he should not be eeced
that were the ruef that vers the law TO govern US
coud ace WHY there was leg aud constituuoha neces
t for majority Of the members ~ the Iowa senate being
present at the time when the election TOOK place.
no binding act OF legislation could De per ;thot tho
concurrence Of quorum. 1t might be, that oil tne MI
one OF the senate could not vote % oue
person and thirty against him; and yet ne snouu nap
pen to have majority of tbrtytwo OF his friends IN the
other house he would be elected. Then for what legal
purpossAfor what binding constitutional
ihe other thirty he there2 AS remarked before, the
senate was present Without there being actual ms
jority Of its members present. Ion see 'na' hahiS''0
here every day. . a;,vs
this question The thoughts which bave thrown out an0
the train of thnking in which have INDUCED, have
brought my mind to the conclusion that the sttng me
Der entitled his seat throw out these views now so
that they may be overturned willing they shou
Ee 10 argument; but unless they overturned neno
vote id favor Of allowing the senator ron Iowa Se'p
Mr. TOUCEY Mr. President, the question involved Ia
this discussion simply thsnore other neither less nor
more was the senate of Iowa present IN the nail OF te
house of aves when this alleged eecton took
place? After the construction to which auson mas oeeh
made early put upon the constitution, that Is she only
question which arise II we acquiesce 10 tns
ton and that question does depend in the least degree
upon any that Congress might pass or that the egs
lature of Iowa might pass 1t depends on the TACT anu th
to be asceraned the actual state OF things then eA
isting -;,o. :, q,
many Sords that senators OF the United states sha DO
chosen bv tn legislatures of the respective Sa'e No
other BODY than the le sature OF State can elect sfn
tor to seat on this floor. no law OF any oe e
scribe what the legislature IL upon ue e
tuition of the State The legislature OF oe = s
that possesses the awsmaking power and th> ~;
of Iowa prescribes, in many words, that the ee 80,
power shall be vested senate ana mouse OF rePtes
ves That and that house OF represenat' es io
the legislature OF Iowa. and that legislature must ehoose
senator for Iowa. has been or can be chosen;
Now sir has the legislature Of Iowa the power, directly
or indirectly to dispense with the attendance OF einer
branch Can the legislature OF Iowa alter the @ on
of the United States the consultation OF iowa me
whole question be determined by an exaninauon
the instruments and then by ascertaning ,ne acs
whether the OF Iowa present and parcFaups
at the time of the alleged election.
Early after the formation of the constitution of the Uni.
ted States the question whether the two bodies OF
which State legislature consists could meet in joint con-
vention aud there elect senator of the United States
agree that practice has been established which on tnis
occasion ii is unnecessary disturb that both branches
may in joint convention, and may there elect sena-
together in pl and ballot together, and tn
body separation enters on its records the dogs OF
the joint convenonhe dongs of the senate and the do
ngs OF the housetha they may certify the action OF the
legislature This having been done and the proper ocer
of the State having certified that tbe senator elected
question could taken The validity of the proceed
ngs but that practice proceeded the ground that the
result the action of both branches constituting the
/ legislature. That is not the question here.
The question here s whether you dispense with the
action of the senate and in every other whether you
can dispense with the action of either body Now let me
suppose that the day when the alleged election took
place the house of before the hour OF ten
arrived had resolved that they would not meet In conven
ton and had adjourned, there being large majority on
the side ia The senate and small majority on the
other side in the house. aud after the house had adjourned
the minority of the body of the house remained and the
in and by the action OF minority OF the
house of representatives and majority OF the senate
present had undertaken to elect senator OF the
n tn~4ru AID haze h.a.