The Evansville daily journal. [volume] (Evansville, Ia. [i.e. Ind.]) 1848-1862, 1859-01-28
indiana Memorial to the U. $. senate.


CONCLUDED
Your honorable body will at once per-
ceive that on motion, concurrent or joint res
olution, for electing Senator's or other
proposition for that purpose, had been pre-
viously made or attempted. The Senate
had never been invited by the House, or the
House by the Senate, to join, participate in,
or consent to, any such election or elections.
The object, if there was an object, was studi-
ouslv concealed; at least so far as the jour-
nails of either House show. The election
thus held, by which the present incumbents
claim their seats, was without the knowl-
edge, consent, or participation, of quoram
of either House of the General Assembly !;
and, notwithstanding majority of the mem
bers, per capita, of the Houses may have as
sented to and taken part in the proceedings
of said meeting, any election thus had could
certainly have no binding force when the
meeting itself was void. That there was
not a quorum of the Senators present in the
above meeting, if additional evidence is
wanting your memorialist would refer your
honorable body to the protest of the twenty
three Senators who did participate in it,
against the action of the majority of the
Senators who remained in session during
the absence of the protestants. fSee Senate
Journal, pages 4s0-S1-82-S3) Again, if
the action of the majority of the Senators,
who remained in session after the minority
had unceremeniously deserted the Senate
Chamber, was illegal and void, as the pro-
testants allege, your memorialist will leave
your honorable body to characterize the acts,
doings and resolves of the minority out of
hon. ,f f1.a 11 ia fl,o
proceedings against which your meaorialist
now complains, should have been estopped
| by your own acts, distinctly and deliberate
lily performed on two separate occasions ::
the first was in 1855, as will be seen by re-
ference to the Senate journal of that year,
| page 522, wherein they introduced resolu-
ton for the election of United States Sena-
tor, with the following preamble: Where
as, there is no law on the statute book pro-
viding for the election of United States Sen.
ator and in the absence of any statutory
provision it is competent for the Legislature
to pres cribe by resolution the manner of APP
poinfment, and the person to be appoint
ed; therefore, the House of Representatives
concurring therein, resolved, &C.; for
which preamble and resolution they gave
an undivided vote. Again, in 1857, (see
Senate Journal, pages 296 and 1917, they
distinctly averred that an election of United
States Senators by each House in their sep
arate and independent capacity, was legal
and constitutional manner of electing, and
that at the proper time they would so pro-
ceed to elect United States Senators. This
resolution was passed by their undivided
| vote, on the 29th of January, 1857, after
the second adjournment of the unauthorized
( meeting to which reference has hereinbefore
been made, and but six days before its last
session, when tho present incumbents claim
| to have been chosen Senators.
The above are substantially the facts and
| the circumstances accompanying and sur
rounding the pretended election of the sitting
members, and the chief reliance which they
had and have in support of their right, is q
choice of majority of the two Houses in
joint convention.
Your memoralist would earnestly invite
the serious consideration of your honorable
body to the two main points: First, doe:
the Constitution of Indiana provide for
! Joint convention for the election of United
States Senators? Second, if so, was thi:
meeting at which the sitting members were
chosen such constitutional joint conven.
tion2 The answer to these questions your
memoralist will cheerfully leave with youl
honorable body, under the light of the fact:
and circumstances herein detailed.
But, aside from the facts herein embodied
your memoralist would further advert to the
position assumed by those who contend fol
the right Of the sitting members, on th'
! ground that your honorable body has al
ready acted in the premises and decided tn,
issue in favor of the incumbents. You
memoralist would not question the right O
your honorable body to decide any and al
questions of this character upon the fact
adduced at the time of such decision, fo
such is the authority conferred upon you
honorable body, by the organic law of tn
nation. Thas you so decided the presen
question is obvious; but your memorials
would respectfully suggest that the Legisla
tive power of Indiana was at the time yol
so decided, as fairly and fully before you
honorable body, protesting against the righ
of the present sitting members to adms
sion as her Senators, as that Lcgislativ
4 power was then demanding such admission
4 A. majority of the Representatives bu
nota quorum, and minority of the Senator
of Indiana send to your honorable body tw,
persons whom they call Senators, while
minority of the House of Representative
and majority of the Senate, follow up thi
4 with a solemn protest declaring the actiol
Of the former, outside of, and in oonfic
with, the Constitution of this State.
This fact, when taken in connectio
u with the provision of the Constitution
s which requires two-thirds ofaeach house t
constitutes quorum, and in view of the ad
, ditional fact that no resolution for so elect
! ing Senators, was ever agreed upon G
adopted by both or either of the Houses, az
pears to the mind of yotr memorialist con
i elusive that the sitting members were no
commissioners IN accordance with the IT
quiremenfs of the Constitution of the I'm
ted States, or win of the Legislature of In
| diana That there were no other claiman
! contesting the seats awarded the Incumbent
!, your memorialist regard as a matter of 4
> vital moment but; that such decision, fount
ed only upon whatinay be regarded as prin
tacie evidence, should be held as conclusiv
4 and bar to the admission of evidence of
=s- -=-a4a sa4.f