The daily exchange. [volume] (Baltimore, Md.) 1858-1861, 1860-03-12

to the interests of the city rendered it imperative.
Mr.. MCALLIsTER left the matter entirely with the
| Democracy. Let the burden rest upon them. If
| they turn the delegation out, let them do it.
Mr.. TURNER said that he had read that the Grace
was not to the swift, the victory to the strong.
He was prepared to meet his fate let it be what it
may, and while he maintained that his right to his
seat was equal to that OF any other member ON this
floor, he would warn the Democracy that there
was day of retribution coming
Mr.. SMITH left it to the udgment of the House to
decide in the matter. Even though he might coin
eide with his colleague, he would say nothing but
let the House take what course It may.
Mr.. DEN1sON, in the name OF Baltimore, pro-
tested against any legislation in relation to the city
alter they were turned out-if turned out at ALL
There interests of vital import to the city now
before the House, and he desired to see that they
were properly disposed Of
Mr.. GoRDnN, of Allegany, felt that a duty was
now devolvng upon the House which must be per-
formed. The Constitution makes itimperatiye that
we should act. 1t is now the last moment and we
must do duty. While he had enjoyed the friend
ship of many of the Baltimore delegation had lived
on terms of intimacy with some of them, he could
not in his conscience come to any other conclusion
than that their seats must be vacated.
Mr.. MORGAN, of st. Mary's, suggested that the
important measures which the House has to con-
slider cannot now be acted upon. None of the
measures can be perfected and the Baltimore dele
cation need not be apprehensve of any action upon
them. No action can be taken upon the Baltimore
and Ohio Railroad bill. The Chesapeake and Ohio
Canal bill cannot be reached. 1t will not be acted
upon. The gentleman from Allegany knows it.
(Mr. GORDON-Yes, sir-I am overheard | ac-
knowedge)
Mr.. MORGAN continued.-The Brock bill is dead
and buried deep that this Legislature cannot
reach it. 1t is completely dead No one who
voted against it could be expected to change his
! vote. No man who voted against it Yesterday can
Fote Tor it to-day without suspicion. So in every
Poln5 OF view nothing of interest to Baltimore city
| could be performed.
| Mr.. GoLDsBoRoUGH asked if the gentIaman meant
! to be personally offensive
Mr. MoRGAN.-No, sir; do not doubt the SINGER
iity any gentleman who voted for the bill. l be-
those who voted against it. But do mean to saw
| that any man who voted against it Yesterday can
not vote for it to-day without incurring suspicion
| Mr.. KRAFFT.-lf. the suggestion he made was OBJ
| iected to, he withdrew it. He did not withdraw
it. He merely threw it out to further the interests
| of his constituents, who would in all probability
be unrepresented at the last moment, when repre-
sentation most needed.
Mr. MTLLER.-Held no responsibility to the Balt
more Sun. lie did not represent it or the people
| of Baltimore. He represented the people of Cecil
| He was responsible to them and to them alone for
his acts, he had done what he thought to be right
| If he erred at all, which he did not admit, it was
an error of the head, not,the heart.-While he hac
the greatest esteem for the Baltimore delega tion
| he could not do otherwise than vote against them
Mr. LANDING moved to postpone further actor
in the contested election case of the Baltimore dele
| cation.
Mr.. FoRD objected to the motion, and briefly ar
| gued against it.
Mr.. DENIsoN, of Baltimore CITY, requested Mr.
Landing to withdraw the motion, which was com
| piled with .
| Mr.. MEDDERs renewed it; the motion was put ant
| lost.
| Mr.. DENNIS, of Somerset, arose and said he con
CURED with the Democracy in the belief that il
| was a grave and important question, which now
occupied the attention of the House. With this be
lief he was disposed to give it all the attention pos
sible He therefore called for the reading of the
report of the Committee on Elections The request
complied with.
Upon the conclusion of the reading of the report
Mr.. DENNIS, ofSomerset, asked if there was any
endorsement of the paper to show that it had been
| read before.
The Clerk replied in the negative, but said that
when the report taken to the printer an en-
dorsement was wrapped around it.
Mr.. DENNGs.-I recollected the fact that the re-
port was read by the Chairman of the Committee
on Elections from his desk-was not read by the
Clerk-it could have no endorsement, and there
fore there was not any previous reading of the re-
port, and this was its first reading. He called for
reading of the minority report.
Mr.. DENNIsoN, OF Baltimore county, stated that
there was in parliamentary law no minority re-
port. Committee cannot make two reports
If minority report is made it must be taken as a
substitute for the majority report if either was
adopted.
The SPEAKER decided that the gentleman's point
of order was not sustained, it must be overruled
The CLERK then produced the only minority re-
port which had ever been made, and it proved to
be a minority report of the Committee in the case
of Jarrett as. Purnell. The motion of Mr.. Denni-
son was thereupon withdrawn.
Mr.. DENNIS then called for the reading of the
testimony, upon which the report of the committee
was based in the case of the Baltimore delegates
lie wished for information upon this subject. The
rules of the House sustained him in his call. How
ever, to show that he not factiOus he would
make propostion to the House. 1t was well
known that il the House expels the members of the
Baltimore delegation all the past of the Legs-
lature would be vitiated. One gentleman has re-
signed, or rather acknowledged that he never had
any right to a seat the floor. If it is decided by
the House that ten other delegates are not entitled
to seats the number of sitting members of the House
would be reduced to 63.
Now, section 10, art. 8, of the Constitution pro-
vides that ''NO bill shall become law unless it be
passed in each House by majority of the whole
number of members elected and on its final passage
yeas and nays be received" Many measures adopt
ed by the House passed by bare constitu-
tonal majority of all the sitting members allowing
that every seat was filled But if it was decided
that these gentlemen did not hold their places all
the acts passed would be null and void. The East
ern shore bill was passed by barely 80 votes. If
eleven members were taken away from the House.
it would require 80 votes to make law, and the
record of votes would show only 80 legally cast in
favor of that bill. On these grounds he appealed
to his Eastern Shore friends to abstain from any
action in the premises 1t would clog all the egis-
would desire to complete such rash attempt. The
interests not only of the Eastern Shore, but of all
the counties in the State, to be risked.
Mr.. GORDON said the gentlemen appeared seri-
Gus in what he said He raised question upon
the validity of great measure-upon all the mea-
adopted during the present session ofthc Leg
isature. Does he expect to be influenced by
anything like this Our duty here is to do right
we are sworn to do it, and must perform it, and
not give consent to a compromise. If all the
acts of the session annued, let us do duty.
But apart from this the gentleman is mistaken in
his construction of the law this point. 1t has
been decided in all the Courts of England and our
own country, that all acts done by de fdcto in
office, valid until they are removed. He re-
membered decision of the Superior Court of Mas
sachusetts, of this character. sheriff was ap-
pointed by the distinguished Elbridge Gerry, while
Governor of Massachusetts. The sheriff afterwards
proved ineligible. His acts, while in office, were
contested and the Court decided that so long he
was de facto in office, all his acts declared
valid and of full force. These members de faco
members of this Legislature, they have been ad-
mitted to seats upon our floor, have been sworn,
and all their official acts valid There is no
law to contradict it.
Mr.. DENNIS, of Somerset, replied that the gentle
man has overlooked one important thing. He has
based all his argument upon common law, forget
ting that we live under constitutional form of
government, and that that instrument provides
that majority of all the members elected shall be
required to pass law. Now, if these gentlemen
are declared not to have been leced, their vote;
were not constitutionally cast.
Mr. DENNIS then called for the reading of the
testimony in the case. He wanted the written tes-
timony. There being no manuscript copy it could
not be produced and to waive all accusations Of a
factious objection he called for the reading of the
testimony. He would not ask either for the manu-
script or printed copy. He called for the testi-
mony-nothing but the testimony, in the of
the Baltimore contested elections
Mr.. GORDON replied that the House should and
does act under both the common law and the writ.
ten Constitution. In Massachusetts, the common
law was the same in own State. The princi-
piles involved in the cited were identical with
the principles involved in the question now at is
sue. The preservation of the public interests are
required. 1t is necessary for consider the
acts of the gentlemen under the present circum-
stances, as valid were the acts of the Sheriff.
The delegates from Baltimore are up to this time
de facto in of1ice-a their past acts are valid
Until they expelled by this House they will pos
sess all the functions of legislators.
Mr.. BRIsCoE hoped the gentleman mi ght be al
lowed the privilege of bringing the testimony be-
fore the House, but give him notice that we will
move to dispense with the reading oft. We have
majority and do not intend this factious op-
position to succeed If the Speaker decides ag anst
us we will appeal and reverse his decision, without
any discourtesy to him.
Mr.. DENNIS wanted that fact remembered, that
the gentleman has declared a combination here to
annul the rules of this House, and to trample on
the rights of its members
Mr.. GORDON contended that the rules not for
the purpose of dstractng but facilitating business
The SPEAKER stated his views with regard to the
question. He did not regard the call as one for in
formation, but rather to retard the progress
of business.
The question was then put as to whether the testi
mony should be read, and the yeas and nays de-