New-York tribune., 1867-08-01

inc question then came upon the amendment OF MI
Mr. FULLER (Rep., Monroe) said there was a necessity
that challenges should be made at the registry board as
wen as at the polls But If IL were made absolute ieoh
c0uld exclude @ al papers relating to his case - A.. 80
MT EyARTs eII NewY9rb had voted for the the re-
tirely their protection of the right of suffrage Un9ues
or When chSilebgeG 70 disPace his record and this led
most of those Who voted for reconsideration to be in
SSGT S Of g he @ vote not be- given
20 any board but should be determined upon the oath
M Misbed 'h0 afteTwaFd SST for casting spurious Vote
He would suggest lieu Of the making challenges in all
cases strictly dependent upon the oath OF the challenged
such substitute as that all challenges except for
mission Of crime and omission 70 register TO register
should be determined upon the oath OF the person cha
MT' GREELEY Rep westchester should oppose the
amendment on this ground, viz; man comes up
and says his name is John Wilcox: Ten
%o SS they are NOT allowed to present @
proof and he goes in to vote on his oath This
Therefore he should oppose it. But he was willing that
the friends Of the amendment should be allowed per
Mr.. EvARTs Rep., New-York desired to have his
amendment apply to all objections to voting that are for
crime he wished the record of crime to stand exclude
the voter But he knew of other ground which he
Mr.. NJ l. TOWNSEND (Rep, RensselaerJ wished to
have the words Eat the polls added by the mover of the
Mr BARNARD Dem, Kings agreed that this addition
would save time on the day OF election, and facilitate
business man challenged may say, 81 have dozen
witnesses here on my behalf" and the time Of the In
spectOrs would be consumed in deciding the question: to
the exclusion of many others.
Mr. HITCHCOCK rep, Washington moved 10 amend
by adding the words, at the polls" The amendment
accepted.
Mr. c6NGER Dem, Rocklandl held that any chal
lege az the polls might oct harshly class who had
not yet been mentioned. The requirement that applied
TO the naturalizedczen might also apply 10 the native
born citizen, and compel him 10 produce his bapsmal
record at the polls They ought 20 have general laws
by which every citizen could purge himself Of chal-
lenge by his oath.
Mr. LAPHAM Rep., Ontario) found the Committee
again venturng upon the field of legislation. The whole
subject should be left to the action OF the Legislature
There was no necessity 10 make provision In the iunda
mental law which will prohibit changes as long as the Con
stuton lasts although experience may show change
TO be necessary and desirable.
Mr.. CHESEBRO Dem, OntarlO) did not concur with
this view
The question beipg taken upon the amendment OF Mr.
Hitchcock, it was carried by vote Of 60 TO 25.
The original motion amended was then put, and lost
Mr. VAN CANiPEN CRep., Cattaraugus) moyeda recon
sderatOn OF the vote by which students any seminary
Of learning retained their home residence.
Mr.. GREELEY (Tiep, Weschesterl did not wish the
Convention decide whether the student gains loses
residence by going to seminary of learning that must
tOn not 20 legisate IL were question OF fact upon
question of circumstance. Let circumstances decide
whether has gone away 10 i've. only abscned
himself for brief time. Sometimes the student settles
Convention should not discriminate In favor OF the me-
chanic and hodcarTier against class who were certainly
no less intelligent.
Mr.. c. c. DWIGHT Rep., Cayuga) favored the recon
sderatiOn because lie had noticed the operation of the
law the OF students in the theological seminary
Mr. BARKER (Rep. Chataqua) said there pro
hibtion against a students gaining residence at the
place where the college which he entered was located,
Mr. CHEESBRO Dem, OntariOl objected to students
gaming residence at the place where they studied,
without having lost their residence at thelr homes
Tho Yeas and Nays called and the motion 70 re-
consider lost by vote OF 81 TO AZ, as follows: