The Congressional Globe, Volume 13, Part 1: Twenty-Eighth Congress, First Session Page: 57
xxiv, 696 p. ; 25 cm.View a full description of this book.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
V 1
CONGRESSIOML GLOBE.
PUBLISHED BY BLAIR AND RIVES, AT ONE DOLLAR PER SESSION, IN ADVANCE.
28th Cong 1st Sess.
TUESDAY, DECEMBER 19, 1843.
Volume 13>...Nq..,13. ,
[ Continued from No. 2.]
man of Alabama were announced to the Speaker as
being in attendacce. They were qualified, and took
their seats.
Mr. ELMER moved that the papers and docu-
ments relating to the cases of contested election re-
turns, which had been referred to the Committee of
Elections, be referred to the same committee.
The Speaker left the chair, calling Mr. Cave
Johnson thereto pro tem.
The motion of Mr. Elmer having been agreed
to, the papers were referred accordingly.
Mr. GARRETT. DAVIS offered the following
resolution:
Resolved, That the Committee of Elections do inquire and
report whether or not Messrs. Edmund Burke. John it.
Reding, Moses Norris.jr., and John F. Hale, members of this
House from the State of New Hampshire; Hugh A. Haral
son, Ahsalom Chappell, John H. Lumpkin, Howell Cobh,-
Wllliam H. Stiles, Alexander H. Stephens, and Edward j.
Black, members of this House from the State of Georgia;
John Jameson, Gustavus M. Bower, James B Bowlin, James
H. Relfe, and James M. Hughes, members of this House
from the State of Missouri, " and Jacob Thompson, a mem-
ber of this House from the state of Mississippi, have been
elected in conformity to the Constitution and the law, aud
whether they are entitled to retain their seats as members
of this House for the 26th Congress.
Mr. STEENROD said this was an important
matter, on which he was desirous that the speedy
action of the House should be had. For the pur-
pose of testing the sense of the House, he moved to
amend the resolution by striking out the words
"Committee of Elections," and substituting there-
for the words "select committee."
Mr. ELMER said the committee were unpre-
pared to enter upon that matter, and he would there-
fore be under the necessity of moving to lay the res-
olution upon the table.
Upon this motion Mr. DAVIS asked for the yeas
and nays.
Mr. ELMER then withdrew his motion.
Mr. HALE said he hoped the resolution would
not pass. And in saying this, he only said what he
had said before, and what he deeply regretted to be
under the necessity of saying again. AH that they
wanted was, such an investigation as every man
upon that floor was entitled to. If the resolution
should be adopted, he would then move a similar
resolution in referenSe to every other gentleman in
the House.
A great deal had been said about the broad seal.
He (Mr. Hale) had but little veneration for seals,
broad or otherwise. But he had some veneration for
the popular will; and he believed that when that
will should be fully and fairly expressed, it would
be conceded that they were entitled, to say the
least of it, to a fair investigation. And, (he asked,)
why had the State of New Hampshire been singled
out, and Georgia and Missouri passed over? Were
not the claims of other gentlemen, who came there
claiming to be members of that House, to be inves-
tigated as well as those of the members from New
Hampshire? Why did the gentleman single them
out? He was willing to be subjected to the saijie
rules which governed others; he desired that all
should be treated alike. If this were done, he had
not a word to say. But what he objected to, was,
that the members from New Hampshire should be
singled out; and, as it were, condemned without a
hearing.
The gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Inger-
soll] had told the House yesterday that this was,
in no sense, a judicial question; find, as he was
upon this subject, he would say that, while he en-
tertained a just consideration for the courtesy with
which the gentleman had expressed his opinion, he
was forced to declare that his own opinion regarding
the duties which devolved upon the House were en-
tirely different. Jt was a judicial question, and a
judicial question of the most solemn character.
Was not the House the grand inquest of the na-
tion? and was not this virtually a judicial proceed-
ing? Were not those gentlemen, whose seats were
to be contested, standing in the position of suitors
at law, who, in the event of the unfavorable issue
of their cause, would incur the forfeiture of all their
privileges upon that floor? It certainly seemed to
him to be a judicial question, of the most serious
bh4 solemn character; and he would iwnch prefers
therefore, that it should be referred to the House
itself, or to a Committee of the Whole House.
Mr. JAMESON" of Missouri said, if he
understood anything about the matter, he thought
he also understood the object of the gentle-
man who had moved this resolution. As far
as regarded the seats of the members from the
four States concerned, there was no contest at
present; there were no persons presenting memori-
als or petitions upon the subject; there were no oppo-
sing claimants fdr the seats. And this being the case,
the members from those States stood precisely upon
the same footing as other members of the House.
The object of the gentleman then seemed to be to
bring the matter before a select committee, and have
a report made by that committee, in reference to
the title of the members from these four States to
their seats, in order to place those members in the
predicament of not being able to vote in their own
cases. It would be a dangerous precedent; and
though it might not touch or effect the title
of any member of the present House, yet it might
be made use of hereafter, in case a similar ques-
tion should hereafter arise; but inasmuch as
there were no memorialists or claimants for
the seat of any member, he could see no propri-
ety in referring the matter to a select committee, unless
to give the gentleman an opportunity to attain the
object which he evidently had in view—of putting it
out of their power to have any voice in the decision
of the question. He was willing to meet the gen-
tleman upon the question; but he wanted to meet
the House as a body. If they were to go into an
investigation of the merits of the question, let it
come before the whole Hoxise, or a Committee of
the Whole House. In his estimation, every man
who had a certificate of return, and had been sworn
in, had the same right to his seat as that which any
member of the House had about whose seat there
was no dispute. He hoped, then, that the House
would not refer the matter to the Committee of Elec-
tions, nor to a select committee, unless they would
agree to refer also the question as to the right of
all the other members of that House. Each and
every man stood equally interested in the matter;
all, therefore, should vote upon the question, or
else none at all. He hoped those who were favora-
ble to the retention of the seats by those gentlemen
who were representing the four States, would at
least refuse to lend theii aid to that which here-
after might be productive of a great deal of mischief
in that House. These were his views, and he de-
sired merely to state them to the House, without
going at all into a discussion of the question, which
was not, in fact, properly before the House for dis-
cussion.
Mr. WELLER could not see what objections
could be offered to the course proposed by the reso-
lution of the gentleman from Kentucky, which
seemed to him to be the proper direction to be
given to the subject. All weie anxious to have a
speedy report find y:tion by the House 111 regard
to it; and this desirable result could be the best
obtained by o reference to the committee whose
peculiar function it was to consider such subjects.
Mr. COBB was also in favor of referring the
matter to the Committee of Elections, A full and
fair investigation of the subject was what he and,
he believed, the other gentlemen equally interested,
were desirous of liavng.
Mr. ELMER expressed the hope that the ref-
erence would be to a select committee, because this
was one of the most important questions that would
probably come before the House, and depended not
upon the investigation of facts, but upon constitu-
tional law. There were several cases of contested
elections that would come before the Committee of
Elections; and that committee would be more bur-
dened with business than any other committee of
the House.
Mr. THOMPSON, as one concerned, was glad
that the gentleman from New Hampshire had with-
drawn his motion. He was aware that there were
many gentlemen who entertained objections to the
tenure oy Which he held his seat; and he was, there-
fore, anxious that a full report should be made on
the subject. He would scorn to hold his seat for a
moment, unless he did so in virtue of right; and for
this reason he courted the fullest investigation,
Mr. BELSER was in favor of the amendment of
the gentleman from Virginia; because, by this owns,
they would sooner get a report on the subject, and the
sooner would it be decided by the House. There
were several cases of contested elections referred to
the Committee of Elections, which would occupy
a considerable portion of their time; but this bemg
an isolated question, not depending on the investi-
gation of facts, a report would be the soonest 'Ob-
tained by sending it to a committee specially consti-
tuted for the purpose.
Mr. R. D. DAVIS argued in favor of the refer-
ence to the Committee of Elections. This commit-
tee, it was known, was selected after much con
sultation on all sides of the House; and was prob-
ably one of the most judicious selections that could
have been made. It was chosen, too, he had no
doubt, in reference to a consideration of this very
case; and the sending it, therefore, to another com-
mittee would seem to imply a want of confidence in
it.
Mr. BLACK intended to vote for the amendment
of the gentleman from Virginia; and in giving that,
vote, he begged leave to differ with the gentleman
from New York [Mr. Davis] last up, who seemed
to be under the impression that its adoption would
imply a distrust of the Committee of Elections. He
had the fullest confidence in that committee; but
doubted, from the nature of their duties, and the num-
ber of cases that would be before them, whether
they would be able to make a report on this subject
at as early a day as it was desirable they should.
He wished to go before the committee that would be
able to make the earliest report; and this, he believed,
would be a select committee. They all remember-
ed the case of the New Jersey election, at the 26th
Congress, how the question was mooted at the very
commencement of the session; and after a reference
to that committee, how they in vain waited for a re-
port: Indeed, he did not believe that a report had
been made to this day. So also in the case of the
Florida contested election at the last Congress: how
that case occupied the committe; how report after
report was made and contradicted in the House by
members of the committee, and producing the bit-
terest altercations. For these reasons, he wished a
reference to a select committee. All that he asked,
was a full, fair, and open investigation, but not a de-
lay till the end of the session.
This question, in the State he had the honor to
represent, could not be called a political question.
On it all parties there were united: both parties
voted for their Representatives under the general-
ticket system; and hence his State presented a
broken delegation, so far as politics was concerned,
on this floor.
Mr. T. SMITH said, that, though at first in fa-
vor of the proposition of the gentleman from Ken-
tucky, he was now not in favor of either that or the
amendment of the gentleman from Virginia; and he
should vote against them both, with the view of
submitting a motion to refer the matter to the Com-
mittee on the Judiciary. This case being one re-
quiring, not the investigation of facts, but an argu-
ment on constitutional law, it seemed to him that
the law committee of this House would be the
most appropriate to refer it to, and that their report
would carry more weight of authority with it be-
fore the country.
Mr. JAMESON said, that if he got an opportu-
nity to do so, he should offer an amendment to refer
the matter to the Committee of the Whole; and
gentlemen would, in time, see that this was the mo-
tion that should be adopted. The object of making
references to committees was, that they should in-
vestigate the facts involved, and report them to the
House for its action. But in this case, there were no
facts to investigate—the question waa wholly one of •
constitutional law; and a Committee of the Whole
House could consider it as well, or better, than any
standing committee. When the subject came before
the Committee of the Whole House, gentlemen
learned in constitutional law could give their views
on it; and these views would go out to enlighten the
public with more authority than a report of a stand-
ing committee.
A message was received from the Senate, by Mr.
Dickins, their Secretary, stating that that body had
passed a resolution, testifying their respect for the
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This book can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Book.
United States. Congress. The Congressional Globe, Volume 13, Part 1: Twenty-Eighth Congress, First Session, book, 1844; Washington D.C.. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth2367/m1/57/: accessed April 23, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.