Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1888-01-24
tee shall reopen no election case wlthou'
first receivino the order OF the House.

tee shall reopen no election case without
first receiving the order OF the House.
Rejected.
Mr.. Mayo (Republican) arose to O
question OF personal privilege and SAID :
Mr.. Speaker, Il rise TO question OF
personal privilege. ask to be DIS
charged by the House from further scr,
vice on the Committee on Privileges ana
Elections. In the contested election oi
Love us. OVERLY, after the case had been
fully submitted 10 the committee, the
argument on both sides concluded, ana
the committee had determined to repor,
in favor OF seating Mr. Love, upon the
motion OF the contestee he was allowed
to take further evidence in the case Tor
period OF ten days in face OF the Hollow
ing agreement made between the parties
at the request of the contestee two days
before the time for taking the evidence
in the case had expired:
LUSESBURo COURTHOUSE, Va, Jan. IL, 1855
Hon. H. r. Pollard. Richmond, Va
Dear Sir,--I received q letter from my counsel
Hon j. =. Wise. informing me tina, your commit
tee mad decided Ia my favor lLoye Us. VVeiOyb
and SEQ from the Dispatch that II Is reoPenoL
write 10 ask that you will see Justice uonS nv,
IA ! have not been notified that am at liberty
TO take rebuttal testimony. 20 croes-exaniAe OF
oven 20 have any voice nc all. Noulu Iestss..E
fully call your attention TO the TACT tuat VT.
overly himself made the proposition 70 me 70
close tho testimony on boin sides, ana yot
will nnd such agreement In tue printed contest
Of the case; and an man OF large family ah1
small property, aod I do not wish 10 -pend
money unless could do "a said aboYe-have
chance % rebut and cross-eHamino. II Mr. OFoI-
by was Ignorant 81 his right 10 continue takiug
testimony what use was It TO enter into an agfeo-
ment 20 close Tho testimony would nave oeen
worthless. which proves that he aha know ~, anu
I hereby certify that no one voted Tor me 70 my
knoglcdge. directly or Indirectly, ~ bro"hS
Store Out those who preferred me. - =,
Yours respectfully, u. IL LIVE
LD.R Love. hereby certify the above y cor
rect. So help mo God. ID. AZ LOVE.
Virgina-Lim burg couniy--to wff'
THIS dag D. r. Love personally appeared be-
tore mo ard made oath that the facts set forth
IA ;he foregoing letter are true.
Givcn under my hand this the ism day OF Jan-
uarv A. d. 1855 JOHN l.. YATES,
CLERK Lunenburg county Court
II mutuqlly agreed between J. w. OVERLY
and d. r. Love that no more dispositions shall DC
faken nv either of Thorn either by AFFIDAVIT or
Otherwise respecting his contested election, and
they aud each Of them here now announce tnenl-
selves "a through the taking Of evidence IN thiS
case. h. q. CLANfbI,
Justice Of the Peace.
On Thursday last the member from
Henrico offered the following resolution,
which was voted down by the House,
every member on the Democratic side
voting against it:
ResolUsd. That It is the sense Of this House that
the Committee on Privileges and elections in no
case should allow the reopening OF evidence IN
any such case before II without hfst being
/ directed 90 10 DO by the order Of the House.
/ Some alluson was made to the con-
tested election of Thebe Ne. Carlisle in
| the House of Representatives as furnish
/ ing precedent for the action OF the com
mittee in this case. But to my mind 1t
/ furnishes an example which Is conclusive
against both the action of the committee
/ and that of this House in sustaining 1t.
in the case OF Thpbe rs. Carlisle be-
/ fore the committee had undertaken to
hear the case on its merits motion was
made bv the contestant to allow him to
reopen the case and take further evil
dence. The committee, after hearing
discussion of the motion, by majority
reported the matter TO the House with
the recommendation that the request to
reopen the case be not granted; ana
every Democrat in that House voted to
sustain the majority of their com
mittee. Hence 1t will be seen that
the committee dared not reopen a
case which they had never taken up
for final action without the consent OF
the House whereas your committee have
taken the whole matter into their own
hands without asking the consent Of this
House in case which had been heard
and upon which the committee had taken
the vote and were ready to report.
l cannot agree to serve longer on a
committee that has so grossly violated
the law, and whose injustice and disre-
gard Of law and right have been sustained
and approved by a majority OF this
House.
Mr.. Ryan denied that the committee
had ever determined to report in favor Of
Mr.. Love.
Mr.. Mayo said that the Democratic
newspapers had so reported and Mr..
Wise had so written to Mr.. Love.
Mr.. Waddill asked if the gentleman
(Mr. Ryan, could deny that the commit
tee had taken substantially the action re-
ported.
Mr.. Ryan said they had taken no ac-
ton of that sort at all. He was pro-
ceeding to explain, when the Char ruled
that members were not at liberty to
speak Of what had occurred in commit
tee, and announced that l o'clock having
arrived the special order would now be
proceeded with.
FISH AND FLOUR INSPECTIONS.
The House bill abolishing compulsory
inspections Of fish and flour came up as
the special order.
Mr.. Flood said that he understood the
bill would be opposed. He moved to
postpone.
Mr.. Buford said that this bill was made
the special order by vote taken on Fri
day last. He hoped that tine House
would not postpone.
Mr.. Figgat supported this view.
Mr.. Echols joined Mr.. Flood in re-
quest for postponement. He had this
morning seen for the first time petition
signed by numerous merchants and citi-
Gems of this State urging the General
Assembly not to DO away with the in-