Year: 1866




We Of course give the above Cheerful lly
and If it shall relieve anybody or any error
| growing out Of the article that ELECTED il.
/ we shall be glad of it. 1t adds to the case.
( as We stalled it, the fact that Senator Foot
| at one time coneurred in judgment with
/ Senator Poland. Perhaps he did 70 the end
/ though it is observable that in the last in
/ terview he did not commit himself, and ad-
| Ylsed Senator Poland 10 act upon hIs own
| conviction of duty, without regard to him.
/ Ii was fit advice for dying Senator--a no.
| bic rule for the living. Had Senator Foot
I lived to listen 10 the debate and unite in the
final vote, we cannot help feeling that his
clear appreciation of the legal and practical
distinction between a legislative body Of co
ordinate branches and powers, and JOINT
assembly. would have led him 10 vote on his
own convictions, with a majority Of the Sen
ate, as well as with at least an equal weight
Of judicial authority IN that body. We can
not agree to put Fessenden and Sherman and
Clark and Howard and Wade below the dis
tInguished lawyers mentioned by Senator
Poland. In fact, we cannot help feeling that
Senator Poland himself would have gladly
voted in the same way ,lhad he not been COM
mittcd by the action of his committee. lie
moved to reconsider the vote declaring Mr.
Stockton entitled to the seat, and that recon-
sidoratiOn resulted in unseating him.


Another thing is added to our statement
Of the case, and that is the ground on which
Senator Poland acted, thus - / hat when
an election was dey0lyed upon particular
body of men, and no express law existed as
to the manner in which they should express
their choice, by the general rule Of parlia-
mentary law any manner, which the ma OH
ly agreed on and which should tend to bring
out the personal cholce and judgment OF the
electors, was valid As applied to the
case, the meaning Of this appears 10 be that,
since the Legislature OF New jersey never
regulated the mode OF elccting a Senator,
except by providing that choice shall be
made in Joint assembly, that assembly had
the right TO blink "the personal choice and
Judgment Of the electors and elect by a
minority. With all respect to Senator Po-
land, We must say that be does not reach
the real point in the case, which was - Is
the Joint assembly Of any state "leglsla-
ture," within the fair meaning Of the Con-
stitution. for the purpose Of regulating the
choice of United States Senator's?


We cannot permit one remark Of the Sen
ator to pass uncontradicted. 1t is this


- In Your article, it seems to be assumed
that in the performance Of my duty, the
politics of the candidate, and the state Of
parties in the Senate, should have been ia
ken into consideration by me-"


He said no such thing, and never intend
ed to assume it, but quite the reverse, viz
- 1t is not personal question, nor a mere
pdrfV question: but whether the Constitu-
tion shall be fairly interpreted and obeyed,
and the states ftly represented in the Sen
ate" We did allude TO the grave political
consequences OF permitting Stockton to re-
tain bis seat wrongfully, or on doubtful
ground, but only as emphasizing the impor-
tance of settling the question right-that is,
in accordance with the Constitution Of the
United States.