The weekly Minnesotian. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn. Territory) 1852-1858, 1857-08-01
been out of order, as have shown. Jeffer
sons Manual saws:


motion to adjourn simply takes nlace of all others
Tor otherwise house might be keIt sitting against its
wn and Indefinitely Yet the motion cannot be
er announcer question is actually put and while the
mouse Is engaged In voting.
Now was not the House actually engaged
in voting when the motion to adjourn to
certain time and place was made Tben
was 1T not out of order? Certainly it was
las decided by the best authority that can
be produced. Again, Jefierson's Manuel.
page 16l II
1t might be asked whether motion for adjournment
for the orders Of the day be made by one member
while abother is speaking. 1t cannot
| Was there not at the time gentlemen
occupying the foor2 Was not Mr.. North
putting the question Under three rules,
then, motion to adjourn to a certain time
and place at that time, was out of order.
Again, it has been the universal rule to
ascertain who the members of deliberative
body are. before motion of this character is
made. will not here refer to precedents in
detailbut will refer to the journals and debates
OF every Constitutional Convention, and of
every legislative body. They will show that
the trst business is to make ont list of
members. That there may have been excep-
IONS to that course, will not deny but I
nave no such exception now in nv mind.
| IL has generally been conceded that there
ls no deliberative body, to act upon any mo-
ton, except merely motion for the apnoint-
ment OF a temporary chairman. and temnora-
ry secretary, until after the roll is called. and
until 1t was ascertained who were actually
members Of the body. refer to the !, mr..
nails of Wisconsin, Massachusetts. Ohio In.
diana, New York, Iowa and all otl ers-cases
where they were called to order both bv the
Secretary of State and by members of tie
body ITSELF here refer to the editorial of
the st. Paul .4dvertiier of July o. l have
shown you, according to the best Of nv
ability, at the present time, that those who
present themselves to any deliberate body
with certificates Of election from the proper
authority, are first entitled to seats-that
such certificates are held to be prima facie
evidence OF their rights to seats-to which
rule there have been but few exc, ptions.
have shawn you that the prominent leaders of
the Democratic party of this Territory re
cognlzant OF that law governing delibeIative
BODIES, and have acted upon it, in Congress,
IN other Conventions, and in our Territorial
legislature. l have shown you that some
OF them have been personally engaged in en-
forcing that general and universal rule. Gen.
Shields, prominent member of that party,
was himself admitted, under objection made,
to seat in the Z. S. Senate He presented
himself with prinaa facie evidence OF his right
to such seat. Mr.. Douglas moved that he
be sworn in Immediately; and he would not
ali' the Senate to proceed to business un-
I'll he was qualified, contending that Illinois
should be represented in that body, and that
Immediately; and that in was right and lust
that he should be admitted upon pqimu tacie
evidence and he was admitted. and after
wards it was proven that he was ineligible.
have shown you that very many of those
who are assembled in the Oti er end of the
Capitol, are men of large experience in legis-
lative bodies, and have themselves assisted in
establishing the universal rules have brought
to your notice. l have shown YOU who the
persons are in this Territory from whom that
prima facie evidence should come, and from
whom only it can come.
What other conclusion then can anv indi-
vidual come to, from the course pursued by
the Democratic leaders, than that it is their
determination to prevent the immed ad
mission OF Minnesota into the Union as a
sovereign and independent state? Upon
what other ground can you explain the &C.
non OF those men in acting directly contrary
to their own knowledge, and contrary to what
is right, just, usual parliamentary and cour-
teous? Can any one explain the matter up-
on any other grounds?
1t has been suggested that our rcpresen-
tatlve in Congress Mr.. Rice) procured the
passage OF the Enabling Act, and that this
was an indication that the Democratic rartv
was in favor of our immediate admission into
he Union. True lie did procure the passage
OF that act, and in doing SO he acted in ohedi-
ence to the voice Of the people of this Terri
tory, and undoubtedly he and the Democrat
nc leaders at the time thought it would be an
easy matter Tor them to escort the new State
INTO the Union under Democratic auspices
But an election of Delegates to this Conven-
ton has since taken place, and it resulted in
living the Republicans majority OF Dele
gates IN the Convention and the signs Of the
times pretty clearly indicate that if the State
was to 60 into the Union now, the Republi-
cans would have the pleasure of escorting
her in. That has become evident to the lead
ers oil that party, and to others. Then what
was the next course for them to pursue /? 1t
was to prevent the State Of Minnesota if pos-
Slble from going into the Onion 1t was first
to break up, if possible, the deliberations of the
Constitutional Convention entirely; to with.
draw from the Convention, thinking there
would not be quorum to organize, and thus
leteat the formation Of Constitution
hey violated all parliamentary law, all usag-
IS, and all courtesy, yet failed in their at
empts. What next? They secede from
his Convention, and enter upon the fo,ma-
ion OF another Constitution, in order tn con.
use the minds of the people, for the purpose
apparently OF carrying the impression to the
'eople that they are IN favor of admission in.
o the Union as a State, because they dare
lot openly violate the universal feeling and
leslre of the people But they want to do
IN an indirect manner, and the question
low remains to be solved whether the people
# this Territory will permit tie leaders Of
hat party, for selfish purposes, to defeat tho
doption OF the Constitution which we NAV
rame here. The reasons for the course they
ursue are obvious. There are certain indi-
iduais IN that party who are very ambitious,
nd who proclaim it abroad that tLey must
e the flrst U. 5. Senators from the State of
Minnesota. But now they see that prospect
ardly growing DIM under the advance of the
republican party, and they are in hopes that
y delay ing the formation and adoption Of g
constitution lew years longer, that their
iilclals, their federal odice.hoGers. and their
lonev, may bring about a different state of
lingS from what exists in the Territory now.
nd that their chance f seat in tn. Z. S.
enate from the State of Minnesota. will be
lncl better than it is now.
But some person may ask, ais it rossblo
nat thu leaders of Il at party can oh alge so
lddenly their course Of action? They have
eretofore acted IN favor of our admission in
the Union immediately, and they have ex-
ressed the nselves in favor of it," Now, sir,
Is nothing new to me to see the leaders Of
nat party change their course of action. or
1eir views upon any subject whatever
lyself have some personal knowledge in ref
renee to this matter. 7 have seen the dc,
rtor " of that party professsedly change his
lind three or four times upon "ne question,
, accomplish certain selfish ends and objects.
nd will here state that that same ind, idu.
came TO me some few days before the meet
70 of this Cow. DtiOn, and acknowledged
,at they were in the minority that thew
d not expect the control of the Convention:
at we had two majority even if they had
hat they clained-four seats from ST. An
ony, a. the delegates from Pembipa, and
delegates from fembina were not err titled
seats according TO his own judgment, but
the party conterded for them lie would
We to. And that every same "dictoto,." has
&C acknOw lodged that Ia of their mo-, borg