The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1857-01-10

from the State Of New York. think under similar eeum-
stances about the time when the State would
not make any nomination, which the from New
York win recollect There is vacancy from California
nnd one from Indiana now, arising from disagreement OF
the same kind. si5
erto the principle that majority of both branch
of the legislature united could elect senator without
the presence of quorum of each of the integral bodies
which constitute the legislature and their action the
subject matter This Is the ground OF the distinction
which, my mind the question put by the senator
from Maine II may be satisfactory tie honorable
senator from Maine the distinction draw. Though
look on il as an irrsgulary which had perhaps better
have been avoided il done with view, presume TO
prevent difficulties between the houses and in that spirit
commendabe but certainly in the early stages OF the
government in the better stages of the government
Mr.. FESSENDEN. Do understand the senator to say
that when convention has been formed by the
action of the houses either of those bodies may
without the consent of the other, dissolve it2
s MR. . n %c nTss ssnss NOT aonS o. m
prescribe convention yet II either body chooses by the
Of majority dissolve that convention, and there ia
sbility their constituents beyond all question seems
me- valid election take place. One house could
not dissolve the convention by retiring after the election
had taken place. any than could prcvelt the pas
sage of bill by the action of house of Congress after
each had agreed to it, If the houses have come to-
gether and acted as joint meeting one house cannot
woke the joint action but before the election has taken
place. either of the coordinate branches of the legislature
may prevent it, though their action is in defiance of the
manner Of holding elections lit were not So the assup.
tion would be that the legislature of State in regulating
the time and place and of election could
election by another body thn the legislature That is
the necessary result because certainly tho choice is not
made by "he legislature" uness both political bodies
which constitute the Legislature present and in
matter.
There is another question Mr. President connected with
remark of the honorable senator from Ohio Mr. PU6H
He in reference to minor question in my Judgment and
he first looked the provision of law under which the
joint convention held he thought nasmuch az il pre-
scrbed that the eers, who judges of the election
should be appointed BY the respective houses prior to the
election of SENATOR and the joint convention In the
sence of the teller OF the senate undertook joint
venon and not by an act OF the senate to elect teller
substitute that act fatal to the validity of the ey
ton, because it did not under the law How did he
get over the difficulty He usage controlled that
Usage Where there any usage in the cage Does the
act OF particular legislature directly in the face of the
law under which they acting constitute usage within
any known meaning of the term usage2"
But further, 1t is remarkable fact that there Ia doci.
ded discrepancy between the journals of the senate and
house in reference to this matter. Both bodies were to
one presented in the report Of the committee a page sixty
tive an account S given Of the appointment Of elers
the first Joint meeting when both houses agreed to
cember, the first day they met after describing the
sage sent from the senate that 1t ready proceed
the election end after stating the concurrence of the
house in the amendment Of the senate and announcing
the meeting of the joint convention the journal Of the
house says:
The president appointed Mr.. Workman teller on the
on the part of the house" IN "a,
The honorable senator from Ohio says that shows the
construction which the Legislature placed the statute
although the law perfectly plain that the teller be
elected by each branch Of the separately That
appears from the law of Iowa. presented in the report of
the committee The provision is that at any time prior
to meeting in convention aforesaid after the for
meeting has been designated aforesaid each branch of
the general assembly shall appoint teller and the two
teers thus appointed shall act judges of the election"
honorable en- nd hat
the authority given to each branch 70 appoint tell
le who made judge of the election the joint con-
ventlon could not undertake to appoint substitute
emily wish he had carried his principle further If he had
he would have that the Joint convention had no
authority to compel the attendance Of members that being
not in session. the members of the houses had
authority to act legislature at ALL whether by joint
meeting, concurrent resolution in any other way
He admits the force Of the objection this point but he
gets rid of it the ground of usage Whom look at the
journal Of the senate Of Iowa. page a. find the entry
in this form s6a#s &88
The president stated The object Of the convention viz
the election of United States senator the election
three sapreme court judges and that Mr. Workman of the
ana Ar kn'' e the house. had es'n appointed
Each Eouse was authorized keep Journal and the act
was stated having been done in accordance with the law
under which that body assembled, in the journal of
house. and stated in the journal Of the other house
having been done in direct violation of the law On the
presumption that they did not act wrongly until the con-
trary appears is not the rational suppositon that the
record of the senate correct and that the eers
appointed by the respective houses under the mandate OF
the laws If how the senator from Ohio get rid of
the difficulty that the alleged joint convention where only
branch of the legislature represented undertook to
legislae revise the law of the State and appoint tel
Ter who Judge of the election without any authsrty2
Again. Mr. President the honorable senator from Geor-
GIN and other senator's understand contend that the
authority make this election springs from the law
passed in Iowa in the year s47 providing for the election
of United States SENATOR and prescribing the time place.
and of election AS have already stated though
it is perfectly that the legislature have authority
appoint the time place. and manner subject to the right OF
Congress to alter the time and hut not the place.
yet under this authority they cannot authorize any other
body than the legislature to elect The election must
cording TO the constitution be by "the legislature To
ascertain what Is the legislature mus look to the
stution of the State The mistake of gentlemen s in
upposing that provision which authorizes competent
bodythe legislature OF the Stateto fix all matters with
reference the time place. and Of election author
body constitute legislature Of what ia not
fact the legislature The federal constitution rescrbes
that the legislature shall elect the SENATOR - we'll fix
the time and place and manner OF eeoting. They can,
therefore, authorize other body than the legislature
elect What did they do2 To me is very apparent that
under the law Of Iowa. the body calling itself joint
construction
| am making this argument on basis which certain
y cannot be denied nat at the vote taken upon this
occasion there were only fifteen senator's less tnsn
quorum 0f the senate present in the house ana Young
and that the had adjourned and was not IN ses-
sion the time when the alleged election took place
These two facts cannot be disputed Then ct us look
at the provision of the law 1t provides that after GER
tain Joint resolutions have been passed. the TWO houses
shall meet in joint convention Tellers are to be sP-
pointed the of members are to 10 arranged In AL
\ .Io4;.o .rJa nd fha vnp