New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1866-03-24

CONVICTION ne uoeDcu guilty OF Felony, ana imprisoned
at hard labor for term not exceeding ten less than
one year.
Section seven prescribes the duty Of the Collectors
Of Customs.
Section .ss provides tia. eny person refusing to
assist an officer shall be deemed guniy {. :;1S
meanor and punished accordingly.
Section twelve provides that claimants Of goods
seized may prevent summary sale by giving bonds for
costs.
Section wentyfonr provides that licensed vessels on
the north, northeastern, and northwestern frontiers
trading at any port place in the adjacent British
Provinces, aud purchasing goods there, must report
the same to the officers OF Customs at the first port in
the United States at which they shall next arrive.
Section twenty-seven provides that foreign vessels
shall be subject TO provisions relative to manfess in
act Of 1929.
Section twentyeight provides that no domestic
goods shall be unladen on the NORTH northeast or
northwest frontiers without permit.
Section thirty-seyen provides that any person at
tempting to bride Custom Revenue officers agents
shall upon conviction be fined exceeding three times
the amount offered and imprisonment in penitentiary
not exceeding three years.
Section provides that foreign vessels on ar
irving in United States waters must report at the
est port OF entry and not proceed inland without special
permit.
The remaining sections prescribe the duties Of the
Customs officers, pay, &c.
TIE CASE OF SENATOR STOCKTON.
At the expiration Of the morning hour the case
Of Mr.. Stockton, Senator from New.Jersey, was
Mr.. howE addressed the Senate. Whatever may be
the decision Of the Senate said he IL cannot affect the
personal or political character Of the Senator. Mr..
Stockton. He has already decision IN his favor, pro-
nouneed by committee Of this body composed OF
large majority of his political opponents embracing
Of the best If not the best legal talent in the
Senate. IT, Therefore, the Senate decide not to admit
s c.a;ils TO a seat here, there can be advantage
derived TO the party in the majority. The only way
possible for the majority to take advantage by the de-
eision oil this question is by indicating exactly
the law Of the land, and vindoating what is
possibly abstracty and legally right to be done.
SO far as have examined the question at all, have
examined IL in Its reference to the law to what Is
the law Of the case, and If certain that my
conclusions were correct, should eel bound TO abide
by the report of the Committee which has investigated
and reported upon the CUSTOM but it does not seem to
Inc that there two questions which, if put TO the
Senate one after the other would have no diversity
Of opinion upon either among dne members =,
that II asked the Senate whether the vote given
In that Joint connection for the present Senator from
NewJersey, would have elected him under the laws Of
that State in case there had been rule Of the joint
convention pronounced. l think every member Of the
Senate will say no. certainly not II that joint coDven
tion had declared by rule that plurality Of the
votes given should constitute an election, and the con-
vention had gwen precisely the vote they had given
on this occasion viz. 40 votes for the Senator from
New-Jersey, and IL votes against the Senator from
NewJersey do not think there is single senator
cannot have been elected by any such vote as that
Whyi Simply because four votes cannot overturn fl
minority cannot control majority IN the absence OF
other question 10 the Senate whether joint convention
OF the Houses Of the Legislature can by any means
repeal or modify, change law OF the State. think
every Senator VIII say at once certainly NOT. Inc
two Houses IN Joint convention cannot make law,
repeal law, modify O law, or change q law.
That would be the judgment OF every Senator here.
Upon that single question you VIII decide advisedly
Tken IL these two questions are put separately and an
svered in that way in the negative, how happens that
both of them oyerrued when we come to consider
the effect Of them together MT. Howe argued that
had mt Ois1a md
that had right to adopt rule for the election OF
the plurality candidate.
MI FEssEyDEN asked If the Legislature had pre-
sorbed majority rule for the government OF the con-
yention could the convention have Get 1t aside and
adopted plurality rule. .
NJ STOCKTON said it was his opinion that it could
not but the failure Of the Legislature TO prescribe
rues let the convention free to adopt its own rules
Mr. FEssESDES said that II. as YVES claimed by some
Senators the joint convention was the Legislature and
had legislative power, it had right to repeal law as
well as make one.
Mr.. HENpRIcKs spoke in favor Of retaining Mr.
Stockton. When the question was before the Judiciary
Committee he (Mr Hendricks) was very confident that
the sitting member entitled 10 his seat and he had
since .een no reason 10 abandon that opinion. Upon
the question Of fact there was no difference OF opinion
aud there could be none Inc election TOOK place IN
Joint meeting OF the two Houses OF the Legislature OF
New.Jersey That election took place pursuant TO a
resolution adopted by that joint meeting. lie (Mr
Hendrcks was very clearly Of opinion that that JOINT
meeting had the power 10 pass the resolution when 1t
ala adopt II was not necessary TO discuss whether
that Convention could by any regulation or rule, depart
from rule prescribed by tho two Houses acting sepa
rately for that question not involved The Legis-
lature acting in its separate branches did not under.
take TO prescribe the rules which should govern the
election 1t simply declared that the election should
take Mace in Joint meeting OF the two Houses and as
70 the mode OF proceeding in that joint meeting the
Legislature adopted rule as law and the question In
his mind was simply whether the joint meeting had the
mower 10 prescribe the rule and elect in the mode In
which il did elect Mr.. Hendricks continued his re-
marks in advocacy Of the right Of the joint convention
10 prescribe rules for its own government.
Mr.. CLARK proceeded to reply the argument OF MI
Johnson made Yesterday IN which be (Johnson)
that the attempt to oust Mr.. Stockton was an
invasion Of the rights OF the people OF
New-Jersey. He Clark maintained that the Senate
hal perfect right TO investigate the circumstances
attending the election Of any one claiming seat IN the
Senate 1t was right derived from the Constitution
and when II was stated that Mr.. STOCKTON came here
against the will OF majority Of the NewJersey Legis
lature-against the will Of majority OF each House OF
that Legsaturethe Senate OF the United States was
not TO be told that 1t was violation OF the consttu
tional right Of NewJersey TO investigate and decide
Mr. CRAGIs took the ground that the majority rule
alone should prevail in the absence OF positive law ior
plurality rule. by the old law Of l94 majority was
required TO elect and that law had never been changed
Mr. STOCKTON replied TO Mr. Cragin, that the law
under which his election was held was altogether dner
ent from the law Of 1894 He read from the law OF lsio
under which he was elected, giving the JOINT conven
tjon the right to prescribe rules for its own govern
ment The proposition now Is that the Senate OF the
United States shall undo the rules by which the JOINT
meeting OF the Legislature OF NewJersey take the
sense 81 that body The whole is this; and there
are meu-clear.minded men and lawyers-who will re-
view this hereafter. There are men whom fallacies
cannot blind these men will not examine II OF argue
in their minds and in their Judgment with any very
nico airsptting technicalties. There are men who
honestly and firmly will look upon the decision in this
Senate without any respect Of party or anything else
and thew will see that decide that the Legislature Of
Newersey is the proper body to determine how 1t will
take the of the body and the Congress or the
Senate Of the United States.
MT. CoNyEss read the rules which govern the Joint
Convention OF the California Legislature, and spoke
briefly Of the necessity Of majority vote to elect
Mr. CowAN sustained the report Of the Judiciary