the members alluded to.

Mr. Stanly. Does not this question of order affect their rights?

tion of Mr. Jones, of Virginia, to amend the bil! by committee on the New Jersey contested election The roll having been called through, Mr. Stanly inserting an appropriation of $300,000 for the sup- case, with a view of having it printed. Messrs. raised the question of order, whether Messrs. Dickpression of Indian hostilities in Florida. Proffit, Stanly, Bell, Wise and others objected; anderson & Co. were entitled to vote? Mr. Keim continued his remarks for a short time, after several ineffectual attempts by Mr. Campbell The speaker said that this was a mere preliminawhen, having concluded, Mr. Adams replied to some to explain that the reception of the report would not ry question of order as to precedence of business, portions of Mr. K's remarks. Mr. Triplell then obtained the floor, and addressed occupy more than two minutes, he moved to sus- and not a question affecting the personal rights of pend the rules. the committee for upwards of an hour in reference to Mr. Wise moved to adjourn; which motion was the expenditures of the Florida war, and in an ex-negatived: yeas 38, nays 61. amination of the monstrosities of Mr. Poinsett's After an ineffectual motion for a call of the house, project for a standing army of 200,000 men. The Mr. Wise appealed to the chairman of the comunitquestion having been then taken, the amendment tee of elections as to the propriety of postponing was agreed to. the presentation of the report until tomorrow. Mr. Campbell replied that he could not consent; and at the same time expressed his surprise at the opposition to the reception of the report, as in one twentieth part of the time wasted on motions to adJourn, &c. it might have been received and ordered to be printed.

Mr. Carter, of Tennessee, moved to amend the bill by inserting an appropriation of $10,000 for the construction of a brass bomb howitzer, on the principle of the invention of J. W. Cochrane, under the direction of the secretary of war. Rejected.

And, on motion of Mr. Jones, of Virginia, the committee rose, and reported the bill to the house, with two amendments.

Mr. Rumsey moved the previous question, which was seconded. And the main question was ordered to be now taken.

Mr. Mason, of Ohio, asked that the question might be taken separately on each amendmentwhich was ordered.

Mr. Lewis Williams then renewed the motion to
adjourn, and it was negatived.

not ordered.
Mr. Stanly moved a call of the house, which was

The speaker said that the interest which the New Jersey members had was, whether they were entitled to seats or not. The question now before the house was a mere question of precedence of business, and the chair, not seeing that they had tore interest in that than any other, was of opinion that the getlemen were entitled to vote.

Mr. Stanly appealed from the decision, and submitted to the chair that the house had already decided this question. The speaker asked the gentleman to specify when. Mr. Stanly said he did not exactly know.

The

Mr. Adams. There was such a decision. question was raised during the time that I was in without success. The motion to adjourn was then renewed, but the chair. I decided then that the members from New Jersey had a right to vote-the question of inMr. Wise said, as the house persisted in its re-terest, as I expressly stated at the time, being not fusal to adjourn, he would renew the motion for a their individual interest, but the interest of their And the first amendment-to wit: that which ap-call of the house. It was evident that Miss Fanny constituents. The house reversed my decision, and propriates the sum of $19,765 for repairs of arse- Elssler was far more popular with the majority than the gentlemen were not permitted to vote. And nals damaged by storm and fire-was concurred in. the business of the country, and if the call were or- now, whether this be a preliminary question or not, And the question then being on concurring with dered, he would suggest that the sergeant-at-arms when I am called upon to vote, I shall vote accordthe committee of the whole on the state of the union be directed to go to the theatre, where, no doubt, ing to the principle I then assumed, and not accordin the amendment appropriating $300,000 for the the delinquents would be found. The question on ing to the decision of the house. suppression of Indian hostilities in Florida-Mr. ordering the call was then taken by tellers, and reMason, of Ohio, asked the yeas and nays, which sulted: ayes 40, noes 46. So the call was not or-sult of the vote would be changed by the admission Mr. Briggs inquired of the chair whether the rewere ordered, and, being taken, were: yeas 123, dered. or rejection of the votes of these gentlemen? The nays 23. So the amendment was concurred in. Several members then simultaneously moved an speaker replied in the negative. And the question then recurring on ordering the adjournment, which motion prevailed; and at 9 bill (as amended) to be engrossed for a third read-o'clock, the house adjourned. ing, Mr. Lincoln said that, having voted against the amendment, and being disposed to vote for the bill unfinished business to be the motion submitted by Thursday, July 16. The speaker announced the notwithstanding he had done so, he would ask the Mr. Campbell, of South Carolina, just previous to yeas and nays; and they were ordered, aud, being the adjournment of the house last evening, to sustaken, were yeas 150, nays 0. So, having been ordered to a third reading-the bill was read a third pend the rules for the purpose of enabling him to time and passed. make a report from the committee of elections.

On motion of Mr. Jones, of Virginia, the rules were suspended, and the house again resolved itself into committee of the whole on the state of the union, (Mr. Dromgoole in the chair).

Mr. Evans moved that the committee proceed to the consideration of the bill to provide for the expenses of making an exploration and survey of the northeastern boundary. [Mr. E. under leave, said the bill would not occupy five minutes].

Mr. Jones, of Virginia, moved that the committee proceed to the consideration of the bill making appropriations for the current expenses of the Indian department, and for carrying into effect the treaty stipulations with certain Indian tribes. The question was first taken on the motion of Mr. Evans, and, by ayes 72, noes 73, it was rejected. The committee then took up the bill commonly known as the Indian appropriation bill; which was read by sections.

The chairman of the committee of ways and meaus (Mr. Jones) introduced a number of inciden

tal amendments from that committee; which were agreed to without debate.

Mr. Craig asked the yeas and nays on that motion, which were ordered.

After some conversation, Mr. Petrikin submitted

to the chair that this was a privileged question, and
that it was in order, therefore, to report at any time.
The speaker decided that it was not a privileged
question.

มะม

Mr. Lewis Williams moved a call of the house, and asked the yeas and nays, which were ordered; and, being taken, were: yeas 53, nays 87. So the

house refused the call.

motion to suspend the rule, and resulted as follows:
The question then recurred and was taken on the
yeas 115, nays 64. So (there not being two-thirds
voting in the affirmative) the rules were not sus-
pended.

Some delay took place in looking for the record of the decision, during which Mr. Stanly expressed chairman of the committee of ways and means himself willing to waive his right to the floor, if the would consent to go into committee of the whole on the state of the union.

After a few moments, Mr. Adams said that there must be a record of the decision.

The speaker said that the clerk stated he could not find it.

1

Mr. Adams. I am not responsible for the making up of the journal at that time, or any other. I state the fact, however, that such a decision was made.

Mr. Stanly inquired whether, if he waived the question now, with a view to go to the regular business of the country, he could bring it up to-mor row?

The speaker replied that it would be too late.
Mr. Stanly then said he must insist on the deci-
in which Mr. S. expressed his own opinion to be,
sion of the appeal at this time. After a few remarks,
that these gentlemen ought to vote, but said that he
was desirious that the house should abide by its
own decisions, he asked the yeas and nays on his

ed it to Mr. Campbell, of South Carolina, who said
Mr. Dromgoole then obtained the floor, but yield-appeal; which were ordered.
that he had two reports from the committee of elec-
tions, involving the rights of members to seats on
this floor, and he submitted that the question was
one of privilege, and that as such, it was entitled to
precedence over all other business.

ed. The appeal was spoken to briefly by Messrs.
Campbell, Stanly, McKay and Cushing. When Mr.
Turney moved the previous question, which was se-
conded. Mr. Proffil asked the yeas and nays on
ordering the main question, which were ordered;
and, being taken, were, yeas 124, nays 66. So the
main question was ordered to be now taken.

and there was a second. And the main question was Mr. Vanderpoel demanded the previous question; ordered to be now taken. And the main question, "shall the decision of the chair stand as the judg ment of the house?" was then put.

Previous to the announcement of the vote, Mr. Davis, of Kentucky, rose and said, that he had at first voted in the affirmative-but that he would change his vote on the ground that these gentlemen were no more entitled to seats in this house than any other person. If he could consider them so entitled, he would sustain the decision of the chair.As it was, however, he could not do so. Mr. Monroe rose and said that for the same reason he would change his vote. And the votes of both gentlemen were recorded accordingly.

Mr. Cushing moved an amendment appropriating The speaker decided that a report from the com$5,000 for the purpose of holding treaties with the mittee of elections was not a question of privilege; Lake and other northwestern tribes of Indians to and supported his opinion by reference to the case procure the cessation of subsidies annually paid fo of the contested election from the state of Mississipsaid Indians. After some remarks from Messrs. pi which occurred at a former congress. From this Cushing and Vanderpoel, Mr. Jones, of Virginia, decision Mr. Campbell, of South Carolina, appeal raised the question that the proposition was not in order not being to carry out any existing treaty or law. The point of order was not pressed; and, the question being taken, the amendment was rejected. Mr. Wick offered an amendment (based, he said, on an estimate furnished individually to him by the war department) appropriating $3,000 to pay the expense of holding a council with the Miami tribe Mr. Stanly raised the question of order, whether of Indians, with a view to the extinction of the certain members from New Jersey, whose names he great Miami reservation in Indiana -the amount to had heard read, (Messrs. Dickerson, &c.) had a right be expended or not according to the discretion of to vote. In the early part of the session it was de-yeas 88, nays 95. the president. Some remarks were made by Messrs.cided that members from New Jersey could not vote Wick, Proffit, Rariden and others, when the amend ment was rejected.

in their own case. The reply of the speaker was
not heard by the reporter, but its character may be
inferred from what follows.

The question then recurring "shall the decision of
the chair stand as the judgment of the house?"

Mr. Jones also moved an amendment, to come in at the end of the bill, appropriating $45,000 to defray the expenses of removing the Winnebago Indians from Wiskonsin over the Mississippi, and for Mr. Proffit asked the yeas and nays, which were the erection of a grist mill, &c. __ This amendment ordered. And the clerk having called that portion was debated by Messrs. Jones, Evans and Bell, the of the roll which includes the names of members latter of whom, at 8 o'clock, not being willing to commencing with Caddress the few members who had not left the hall, Mr. Stanly again rose and inquired whether cermoved that the committee rise; which motion pre-tain members from New Jersey had a right to vote. vailed and the committee rose. The speaker said the proper time to raise the Mr. Campbell, the chairman of the committee of question would be when the call of the roll was elections, asked leave to present the report of the completed.

The speaker then announced the vote to be: yeas 125, nays 38. So the house sustained the decision of the chair, by which it was declared that Messrs. Dickerson & Co. were entitled to votę..

The speaker then announced the vote on the original appeal taken by Mr. Campbell, of S. C. to be

So the house reversed the decision of the chair. And it was thus declared that the question of a report from the committee of elections was a question of privilege, and entitled to take precedence over all other business.

Mr. Campbell, of S. C. then made a report in the case of the New Jersey contested election-moved the printing of the report, evidence, &c. and that it be made the special order of the day for Saturday next. And Mr. C. demanded the previaus question. Mr. Smith, of Conn. (on leave) presented a report from the minority of said committee, and moved the printing.

Mr. Proffit euquired of the chairman of the committee of elections (Mr. Campbell) whether the

The chair replied that, according to the rules off evidence was a part of the report? Mr. Campbell | Mr. the house, a member had the right to withdraw any was understood to say of course it was so. Proffit. Then I call for the reading of the evidence motion he had made at any time previous to a vote on both sides. Mr. Campbell 'submitted, as a ques-upon it, and of course to modify it. tion of order, to the chair, that the gentleman had no right to have these papers read on a question of printing.

Mr. Bolts, Mr. Fillmore, Mr. Triplett and Mr.
Andrews, warmly remonstrated against the unfair-
ness of presenting one proposition to the house, and
demanding the previous question upon it, and when
the house, waiving its right to discuss, supported
that call, then substituting a different proposition,
after all debate was cut off. The right to withdraw,
and the right to modify, were different things, and
one did not necessarily follow the other.
[The noise and confusion in the house was very
great.]

Mr. Campbell repeatedly rose to make a sugges-
tion, but he was called to order, on the ground that
all discussion was prevented by the previous ques-
tion.

Mr. Everett inquired whether the gentleman's original motion, and his modification of it, would appear on the journal? The chair replied in the affirmative.

Mr. Clark, of New York, warmly remonstrated, pronounced the proceeding a base trick, by which the house had been entrapped, and inquired whe

ther the chair adhered to its decision that the modi

Mr. Medill, amidst loud cries of order, made a reply to Mr. Clark, in which the reporter under. When Mr. Monroe's name was called, he said he stood him to say that the whole course of the opposition on the pretended claim of the returned mem-wished to be excused from voting in the house, but bers from New Jersey was an attempt to entrap the would not now detain the house by stating his reahouse. [The din and uproar were, however, so sons, because he intended to give his opinion most great that although at no great distance from Mr. fully on this whole proceeding when out of the M. who was speaking very loudly, the reporter could house. not distinguish his words].

The question was put on the appeal; when the decision of the chair was sustained without a count. Mr. Campbell again rose to make a suggestion-but Mr. Proffit strenuously objected, and insisted he

Mr. Andrews now inquired of the chair whether it would be in order to move a reconsideration of the vote by which the previous question had been

The chair said it would, if the gentleman had voted with the majority.

Mr. Andrews said he believed he had, but was not quite certain.

Mr. Davis, of Ky. said he had voted with the ma jority, and he would move the reconsideration, and

demanded the yeas and nays.

The chair said that whenever a reconsideration

of the previous question was moved, the questionnal of the committee of elections to be printed-
The question then recurring on ordering the jour-
was always first put on the seconding of the previ- Mr Dromgoole demanded the yeas and nays, which
ous question, and never on the previous question
itself; and on the seconding the yeas and nays could were ordered and taken, and resulted as follows:
not be taken, as it was not a vote of the house, but yeas 154, nays 18. So the journal of the committee
of elections was ordered to be printed.
merely the sustaining of a proposal to vote.

On this dictum of the chair a question of order Mr. Proffit said he had not forced this question decision. He had, however, heard of more villany tested with warmth against thus being deprived of upon the house; the house had done so by its own arose, and Mr. Fillmore and Mr. R. Garland progoing on since the reading of this report commenc their constitutional privilege of having the yeas and ed, than he had had any idea of, he had heard of nays recorded. Mr. G. observed that the tyranny things which he never contemplated, and he wish-practised by the majority in this whole New Jersey ed the reading to proceed. The clerk accordingly case had been such as was enough to drive freemen proceeded until the hour of half past 2 arrived, when into open rebellion. Had it come to this, that a fifth part of the house were to be deprived, by a mere sayso of the speaker, of a clear and certain right guarantied to them by the constitution? He demanded a case to be produced where such a decision had been made. He never had seen or heard

Mr. Turney called Mr. Garland to order.

The chair turned Mr. G. to a very recent decision on a case precisely like the present.

Mr. Garland denied the right of the speaker to make any such decision, and Mr. Fillmore took an appeal and demanded the yeas and nays.

Mr. Briggs inquired whether, after the house had voted on reconsidering the seconding of the previous question, if that vote should be in the negative, another question could not then be put on the previous question itself, and whether on this the yeas and nays could not be had?

The chair replying that it could, Mr. Fillmore said that this was all he asked for; and he thereupon withdrew his appeal.

The question was then put on reconsidering the seconding of the previous question, and decided in the negative.

Mr. Chinn, of Louisiana, inquired of the chair whether, after the house had seconded the previous question on one motion, the mover could then alter his motion so as to make it quite a different proposition, and the previous question remain still in

house should have time to be present and vote on so great a question.

Mr. Turney loudly called Mr. Briggs to order for debating.

Mr. Briggs denied that he was debating the ques

tion.

Mr. R. Garland demanded the yeas and nays. Mr. Monroe asked of Mr. Jameson whether it was his intention to force through the house a vote on that report to-uight? If it was--

Mr. Vanderpoel here called Mr. Monroe to order. The chair said Mr. M. was not in order. Mr. Monroe said then he would turn away from the gentleman from Missouri-he had done with him-and he would turn to the chair, and ask of the speaker whether his friend from South Carolina, (Mr. Campbell)-he believed he might call him his friend he would call him his friend, for he believed, after all, that that gentleman did mean to act correctly-had not originally moved the printing of the reports and papers with a view of their being taken up and considered to-morrow? Yet now the house was called to vote at once, under the previous question. What was the meaning of this gag law? He would not vote in that house under such coersion.

The yeas and nays were ordered on Mr. Briggs motion for a call of the house.

Mr. Campbell asked Mr. Jameson to withdraw his

motion.

[Here the noise was so great as to drown the voice of any individual member, and the reply of Mr. Jameson could not be heard; he was understood, however, as refusing.]

The question was put on the motion for a call of the house, and decided by yeas and nays, as follows: yeas 67, nays 75. So the house refused to order a

call.

Mr. Botts inquired whether the parties claiming seats from New Jersey could not now be heard at

the bar of the house?

The chair replied in the negative; it would not be in order after the previous question had been de manded on the report.

Mr. Underwood, who bad just returned within the bar of the house, rose and asked the speaker what the main question would be if the previous question was ordered.

The speaker answered that the main question would be upon the adoption of the resolution reported by the committee.

Mr. Underwood said, what! take that question before the reports are printed?

["Yes, yes," was replied by several gentlemen.] Mr. Underwood said, surely it was impossible; and if that question was forced, he would not and could not conscientiously vote.

Mr. Everett demanded the yeas and nays; which were ordered and taken, and resulted as follows:yeas 70, nays 100. So Mr. E. was not excused. When the name of Mr. Rariden, of Indiana, was called, he rose and inquired of the speaker, if the previous question was sustained, if that would bring the house to a direct vote upon the question of the right to the seats in this house of the New Jersey claimants without affording the claimants the right to be heard, or the members of this house the opportunity to hear one word of the evidence upon which the right to the seats has been or is to be determined?

Mr. Everett moved to be excused from voting on I am now called upon (said Mr. L.) to decide the question, because he had neither heard the evi- upon the merits of this great question; to judge, to dence nor the parties, some of whom, he was in-adjudicate, upon my conscience and my oath, upon formed, desired to be heard at the bar of the house. facts which I do not know, upon evidence which I Mr. Monroe said he should be glad if his name am told exists, but which I am not permitted even could be included with that of Mr. Everett. to see, whether the sitting members are, or are not, entitled to their seats. The alternative presented to me, by the resolution of the committee, is to declare, blindfold upon my oath as a judge, either that these members are duly and constitutionally elected to this house by the people of New Jersey, and this, too, against the official credentials, in the first instance, upon the canvass of the returns by the governor and privy council of the state, given to others, or to show cause, here and before the country, why I resist the conclusion to which the committee have arrived in their resolution, upon a subsequent scrutiny by them of the votes and polls of that election. Sir, I can do neither, understandingly and conscientiously, without time and opportunity for examination. I cannot consent, under the solemn sanctions of duty, to substitute the opinions of a majority of one in a committee of nine members, (nor, indeed of the whole number, if even such had been the fact), for the convictions of my own mind in the required exercise of my own judgment. To do so would be to yield my individual judgment to that of others, as well as to surrender the judgment which the constitution and the laws enjoin upon the house to a committee of its members; and, in my opinion, to falsify and violate both by personal duty and my official oath. This, sir, I will never do.

The speaker said that would be the effect of the previous question, if carried.

Mr. Rariden then said he was against it, as he could not guess at a question of such magnitude. Mr. Briggs said he most respectfully asked the house to excuse him from voting on the resolution now before them. His reasons were, first: if his mind was made up upon a full investigation of the case, he could not, with his sense of propriety and justice, vote to give either set of claimants their seats finally without hearing the opposing claim ants. But there was another higher and stronger reason; it was, that he had had no means of inform ing himself upon the merits of the question. He had not heard or read the evidence, and could not act with understanding and with safety. The evi dence, consisting of a volume of near seven hundred pages, had not been placed before the members of the house. By voting either way he might do injustice to the other party. He begged leave to say that, in this request, he was not actuated by cap: tious motives, but by a sincere wish to be relieved from the unfeigned embarrassment in which he found himself placed in relation to this important subject. This was the first time he had ever made such a request, and by granting it the house would confer upon him a favor, for which they would be entitled to his thanks. The question being put, it was decided in the negative; so the house refused to excuse Mr. Briggs.

Mr. Rives moved to suspend the rule, in order to make way for a motion that the further consideration of the report be for the present suspended, and that it be made the special order for Monday next, but it was negatived.

The vote being taken by tellers, resulted as follows: ayes 64, noes 94.

Mr. Adams asked that he might be excused from voting, for the same reasons for which Mr. Andrews had been excused. But the house refused to ex

The previous question was now put, viz: "shall the main question be now put?" And it was decided in the affirmative, by yeas and nays as fol-cuse him: ayes 49, noes 91. lows: yeas 101, nays 85.

Mr. Lincoln asked to be excused. He said that, ven, he felt himself impelled by the strongest sense of duty to appeal to the indulgence of the house to · Mr. Andrews, of Ky. asked to be excused by the relieve him from a call to vote, at this time, and house from voting upon the resolution of the ma- under the circumstances, on the proposition of the jority of the committee of elections, because, he committee. On taking his seat here, he had sosaid, that resolution was based upon the report of lemnly bound himself to respect and support the the majority, and a state of evidence of which it constitution of his country. That constitution made was impossible for him or any member of this house the house, and each member of it, as a component (not of the committee) to know any thing. His part of the body, "the judge of the elections, revote upon this occasion would be as a sworn judge turns, and qualifications of its own members," and or juror; and as it had been (as every member of imposed high and sacred obligations in the disthis house must know) impossible for him to know charge of this most important of all official fune the extent of testimony and the weight that should tions. The report of the committee, by a bare inabe given to the great mass of conflicting evidence, jority, presented for the first time this morning, he felt that he might subject himself to an act of in- contains a long and elaborate investigation of the justice and violence to his conscience as an honest right of the sitting and the claims of the contesting man by voting either way. He had hoped that the members from the state of New Jersey, with referproposition to postpone the vote upon the resolu-ence to a mass of evidence which the committee tion until Saturday would have prevailed, and thus alone have examined, and upon which they have have afforded him and all others desirous to know, raised arguments and deduced inferences tending to as jurors called upon to render a verdict on so im- justify the conclusion to which they have arrived in portant a case, something of the testimony upon the resolution offered to the house. On the other which that verdict is to be founded. He desired to hand, the minority of the committee have laid bedo justice to all parties, and especially to his own fore the house their dissent to this report, exhibit conscience. He inade this motion in all respect to ing an entirely different state of the case, and comthe majority of this house, and to such as may feeling to a different conclusion thereon. Both these that they are prepared to vote, and render a verdict reports have, just now, been hastily read at the upon so momentous a question as that of the right clerk's table. They must have been but imper. of sovereign states of this republic; and as he hopes fectly heard, and can scarce have been understood. to return soon to his constituents, he desires to re- The evidence exhibited with the reports of the ina turn to them, having nothing of which he would jority, which is now on the table of the speaker, in feel ashamed, or they justly complain. He, there a volume of several hundred pages, has not been fore, expressed the hope that the house would re-seen by a single member out of the committee; nor lieve him from so unpleasant a position as that of has it been within the power of any, and especially voting and rendering a judgment as a sworn judge did he speak for himself, to know its character, or in a case, of the testimony of which he could not by any industry on his part have acquired the slightest knowledge. The question being put, Mr. A. was excused.

So the house decided that the main question on notwithstanding the votes which had just been giadopting the report of the committee should now be put.

to consider the effect it should have upon the issue,
so deeply interesting to the rights of members, the
sovereignty of the states, and the vital principle of
the representative government.

It may not be proper to anticipate the course which I may be compelled to take, unless excused from the vote; but this I will say, that whatever a sense of duty and the dictates of conscience shall prompt, in a matter so serious in principle, and so momentous in its results to the government and the people, I will pursue, at any peril of consequences to myself, from the censure of the house. The question being put on excusing Mr. L. it was decided in the negative: ayes 54, nays 89.

Mr. Lewis Williams, for the same reasons given by Mr. Andrews, asked to be excused, but the house

refused leave.

Mr. Dawson asked to be excused. He said he never had directly or indirectly evaded any vote in that house for party purposes or political effect, and he would unhesitatingly discharge the duty of vot ing now if it were practicable, but it was not, for various reasons. He had not had an opportunity of getting that information which was indispensable to his voting either one way or the other. The testimony in this case had not been printed and laid on the table, nor had it been read before the house. He was called to decide, judicially, on a question resting on testimony which he had had no means to examine. He considered the whole proceeding as unwarranted by the constitution and contrary to the rules and practice of the house, and as impairing his right to decide for himself. The two reports, one from five members of the committee and the other from four, gave conflicting accounts of the facts of the case, and to compel him to decide between them without having heard the evidence was such an act as despotism itself alone, could perpetrate. By yielding to such a requirement he should sacrifice the fundamental principles of the free government under which he lived. An imperious sense of duty, therefore, compelled him respectfully to ask to be excused. At this point, Mr. Turney called Mr Dawson to order. The chair pronounced Mr. D. to be in order. Mr. D. said the attempt to call him to order and to shut his mouth from giving his reasons was of a piece with the whole proceeding, and was but a part of that tyranny by which it was attempted to force him into an act which he could not perform without the grossest injustice to the parties concerned, to his own self-respect, and to his duty to his constituents. The question being put, the house refused to excuse Mr. Dawson.

Mr. Monroe said he would be glad to be able to say, as the gentleman had who just now resumed his seat, that he had never violated the rules of the house. Mr. M. had often violated them, and in all human probability should do it again on this occasion. [Laughter]. When neither the constitution nor the law of the land nor the usages of this house called upon him or permitted him to vote, he would not ask to be excused from voting. He did not ask it. He would assume the responsibility of refusing to vote. He would assure the house they had heard the last of him on this matter; but, as an independent representative from the state of N. York, I do (said Mr. M.) ask the house to hear this: "Mr. Monroe refuses to vote because he has never seen the evidence or the report of the committee; he therefore cannot decide which of the claimants are entitled to seats on this floor."

Mr. Waddy Thompson said: I ask the house to excuse me from voting on the resolution. It is in no wanton disrespect to the house that I say I cannot and will not vote upon the question. This is not an ordinary matter of legislation; it is a case where in the very terms of the constitution I am to act as judge, and under all the sanctions of that sacred character. The case which I am to decide is purely a matter of evidence: that evidence is comprised in six hundred pages of manuscript, to-day, for the first time, presented to the house, and up to this moment it has neither been read nor printed. The resolution may be right: how am I to know that it is not? I cannot therefore vote no. It may not be right: I cannot vote ay. There is but one judge of whom either history or poetry informs us, whose habit was to decide before he had heard the evidence: he was the judge of Hell. I shall not adopt him as a model. I know no case in which an issue can be more properly made, none that will better show to the people the extent to which the reckless insolence of power has carried the majority than this; and it is for that, and not as an idle vaunt that I tell you that I was in my seat when my name was called. I did not vote, and I will not. I defy the power of the house to make me vote. Mr. T. was not excused.

Mr. Pope, in some remarks which could scarce be heard amid the noise, stated his inability to vote without hearing the testimony: he had not prejudg. ed the case, but wished to give an honest vote upon it: but how could he, as a sworn judge, do this, when he had not heard a word of the evidence? Mr. P. appealed, with much feeling, to the majority, for the honor of the house, and the honor of their party, that they would not perpetrate so great an act of oppression. Such a thing had never been witnessed since the foundation of the government. Never before, in any legislative body in this country had persons claiming a seat been denied the privi: ledge of being heard: never had judges been called on to decide without hearing either parties or testimony. Mr. P. was not excused.

Mr. Calhoun said: I ask to be excused from voting, for three reasons, and in three words. The reasons are, that I profess to be guided by my conscience, by the constitution and by evidence; to all of which I should do violence should I vote under existing circumstances on either side of this question. Mr. C. was not excused.

Mr. Bell said he could not ask to be excused, for he was utterly unable to vote, and as it was not his duty to vote under such circumstances, there was nothing to be excused from.

The chair pronounced the motion not to be now in order.

Mr. Mason thereupon took an appeal.

The question was immediately put, and the decision of the chair was sustained without a count. Mr. Erans demanded the yeas and nays on the main question.

Mr. Cooper, of Pennsylvania, asked to be excused from voting on the resolution, because the majority had refused to permit the evidence on which it was predicated to be read. He said that Mr. Saltonstall, of Massachusetts, said he felt im- the evidence was in the possession of the house, pelled, by a sense of duty, to ask to be excused but that the members of the house had no opportufrom voting. I am, said he, wholly unprepared to nity to read it, or hear it read, since it was com vote upon the resolution, and without any fault or municated in the morning; that the question which neglect of my own. The house will recollect that he was called on to decide by his vote was a ju I took a lively interest, and had a decided opinion dicial one; that he could only vote intelligently upon the question which agitated us seven or eight upon it, after he had been made acquainted with months ago, as to the right of the regularly return- the facts, and that, if he voted without a knowledge ed members to seats. Since that time I have known of the facts, he was voting in the dark; that, under nothing of the progress of the controversy. I have such circumstances, he could not vote consciennot read any statements upon the subject, and have tiously, and did not see how the majority could jusnot had ten minutes' conversation with any mem-tify themselves to their consciences or to the counber of the committee upon the evidence in the case, try, for voting upon such a question, or compelor the questions which it presented. How, then, ling others to vote upon it, in entire ignorance of can I now vote? How can I undertake to decide the facts. He therefore hoped the house would exwho are entitled to the seats? cuse him. Mr. C. was not excused.

What is the state of the case? Several months Mr. Alford, of Georgia, asked to be excused ago the subject was referred to the committee: they from voting on the question before the house. He have been ever since engaged in its examination. said the rudest nation of savages never dishonored This morning they have presented majority and the name of man by condemning a fellow being minority reports, the reading of which has occupi- without hearing the evidence. It has been reserv ed several hours. These reports refer frequently to ed (he said) for an American congress, who claim the evidence and to their own journal. The volume to be civilized and intelligent men, to set an exof evidence which you, sir, have just informed us ample essentially violative of every principle of contains nearly 700 pages, was laid upon your table justice. You demand a decision of this question with the reports, this morning. It has not yet been and refuse the hearing of the proof. I demand the placed upon ours; neither has the journal, another right to hear it. I have not heard or seen it. I large volume. We have had no opportunity to read could not. It is now produced for the first time. a word of either. This is a most complicated case, This is a judicial trial. I am one of the judges; presenting very important legal questions, upon my associate judges require me to decide this queswhich an able committee, composed of professional tion, and refuse to allow me to read or hear the gentlemen, are divided in opinion. After a careful proof. You dishonor me by your conduct. I will and laborious examination, they have come to dif- not submit to your tyrannical dictation of perjury ferent results-a bare majority deciding that certain against my conscience. He that conceals or suppersons are entitled to seats in this house, which presses the truth under oath is as guilty of perjury the minority of the committee are of opinion belong as if he swore to a positive falsehood. And the to other gentlemen. I listened attentively to the most charitable conclusion, under the circumstanreading of the reports, until I found that it would ces, is, that the evidence is against you. This is be utterly impossible to form an opinion upon the despotism with a vengeance. But I will not submerits of the case without examining the evidence, mit to its rude and insulting enforcement against not doubting that an opportunity would be allowed me. I would suffer death before I would submit. us for that purpose. I cannot vote understandingly I prefer that what little is known of me in the fu ture should be consecrated by martyrdom for the laws and constitution of my country, than it should be said or written I yielded for a moment to the tyranny of a despotism so unreasonable and unjust.

Mr. Sergeant said: I cannot vote upon the question, for the following reason: the question is of a judicial nature, to be decided according to the evidence and the law, and I deem it my duty never to render a judgment without being informed of the law and the facts of the case, and, in proper cases, having heard the parties. The resolution of the house to decide immediately upon the coming in of the reports, before they are printed, and when there is no opportunity to examine them, or to examine and compare the evidence, all opportunity for dis- upon the resolution. I cannot undertake to decide cussion and amendment being at the same time cut a case which I have had no opportunity to examine, off by the previous question, would be, in my opi-without the hazard of doing flagrant injustice. I nion, to pronounce a judgment without knowledge, therefore respectfully ask that I may be excused and a violation of the dictates of conscience and from voting. Mr. S. was not excused. duty. I consider myself deprived of my vote by being deprived of the opportunity of informing my self how to vote. The question being put, the house refused to excuse Mr. Sergeant.

Mr. Bond also asked to be excused, but what he said in support of the request was totally inaudible to the reporter.

Mr. Slade asked to be excused from voting in this case, because it is morally impossible to render a judgment without being in possession of the case.

Mr. S. was not excused.

Mr. G. Davis, of Kentucky, respectfully asked the house to excuse him from voting on the resolution reported by the majority of the committee of elections in favor of Mr. Vroom and the other four gentlemen associated with him as entitled to seats in the house as representatives from the state of New Jersey, not from any disposition to avoid the responsibility of adjudging the case, but for the following reasons, viz:

1st. Because he understands the other gentlemen claiming the same seats are desirous to be heard at the bar of the house in support of their right; and it has been a universal usage to allow gentlemen placed in such circumstances this privilege.

Mr. A. was not excused.

Mr. Evans inquired of the chair whether the testimony had been read. The speaker. It has not. Mr. Evans. Is the testimony reported to the house, and now on the speaker's table? The speaker. It is. Mr. Evans. I will thank the chair to state of how many pages it consists. The speaker, (taking up a printed volume). It consists of over 600 pages. Mr. Evans. Will the chair state when the testimony was laid upon the table? The speaker. To-day. Mr. Evans. As I am required to vote upon this question, and am utterly unable to do so understandingly, without reading the testimony, I ask that it may be read. [Several voices in all parts of the hall-no; "no"]. The speaker. It cannot be read but by consent of the house. [“No, no," from all parts of the house, by administra tion members. "Read, read," by whig members].

Mr. Evans. If I cannot be permitted to hear the testimony, I shall not vote upon it. After what has occurred, I do not ask to be excused. 1 will not vote.

Mr. Cushing asked to be excused from voting on the question, for the following reasons: the committee of elections (said Mr. C.) present to the house a resolution, on which the meinbers are called to vote. That resolution affirms that certain gentlemen are entitled to seats in the house from the state of New Jersey. This proposition involves many complicated questions of law, and is founded on a vast mass of evidence; and I am called on as a judge in the matter, under the constitution, to decide thereon. I cannot decide these questions of law without opportunity for consideration, which 2d. Because he considers the house in passing on has not yet been given to me. I cannot decide the said resolution to be acting as a court and himself questions of fact without hearing or reading the as a judge, and that as such he is sworn to decide evidence, which, however, has not yet been sub- according to the law and evidence of the case. He Mr. Botts. In order to correct any misappremitted to me for that purpose. Under such circum- has never read the testimony in the case. He has hension that may arise from the statement of the stances, I cannot conscientiously vote either yea or had no opportunity until this day to understand the speaker that the testimony was laid upon the table nay; for I do not and cannot know on which side points on which the several parties rely for a main- to-day, I desire to state that it was laid upon the the truth lies. I am in the condition of the Ro- tenance of their rights. And since then he has had no speaker's table to-day, but has not yet been laid on man judges, when they returned a verdict of non li opportunity of reading and examining the evidence the members' tables; nor has it been seen by more quet. Thus situated, I cannot and I will not vote bearing upon the points which arise in the case. If than nine members of the house, and they the memon the question; but out of respect to the house I a judge of an ordinary court were to proceed to ren-bers of the committee. ask thein to excuse me, for the reasons I have as-der a judgment under such circumstances, I think signed. Mr. C. was not excused.

Mr. Proffit referred to the contradictory state. ments of the two reports. He had attentively lis tened to them both, and his mind had been balanc. ing on the subject, and for this reason he had this morning called for the reading of the testimony.

He asked to be excused, but if the request was rejected, he should refuse to vote. If this were a question of dollars and cents merely, the house could not refuse; how much less when it involved such great principles and such serious consequen. ces? Mr. P. was not excused.

he would be justly liable to impeachment. Where-
fore, not understanding the case himself, and not
having had an opportunity to understand it, he asks
to be excused from doing an act which he would
consider as corrupt, and an impeachable offence it
committed by a judge or a court. Mr. D. was not

excused.

Mr. Stanly hoped no more excuses would be asked for. He would ask for none. Let the majority consummate their work.

Mr. Mason, of Ohio, moved that Mr. Halsted and his colleagues be now heard at the bar of the house.

Mr. Bell. I have never seen it. ["Nor I, nor I," from all parts of the house].

Mr. Lewis wanted to ask a question om Mr. Campbell, chairman of the committee of elections. Mr. Stanly objected.

[Great confusion, and cries of "no, no! order?" yes, yes! let him ask!" No, I object"].

Mr. Hill, of Virginia, asked to be excused.Though he could not promise himself a better fate than those who had preceded him, yet he deemed it respectful to appeal to the house to excuse him. If the majority, without knowing or hearing the testimony, were willing, as judges, to pronounce

upon it, contrary to the constitution, to the forms of parliamentary proceeding, to justice, and to decency, and would suffer themselves to be forced blindfold to the decision of a case they had not beard, they must excuse others who had too much self-respect to follow them. Gentlemen might be content with sinking their own character and the character of this body, without insisting on dragging others after them. How would they stand in the view of the nation? To try the rights of a state of the union on testimony never read, printed, or heard? and judge it upon a single vote given in a committee? Two hundred and forty free representatives surrendering their judgments to the keeping of one committee man! Mr. H. was called to order, and concluded by saying he would have no part in so detestable a farce. Mr. H. was not

excused.

Mr. Rariden asked to be excused from voting on the grounds following:-That the only evidence which has been laid before this house, or that he had ever seen, pertaining to the rights of the claimants to the New Jersey seats, is the certificate of the governor of New Jersey, with the seal affixed, certifying to the rights of five gentlemen to the seats. Nothing has been laid before the house as evidence to impeach the certificate, or the right of those five gentlemen. Common rumor has impeached it on one hand, and the same common rumor sustained it. Five of the members of the committee of this house, in their report to this house, impeach the certificate of the governor, and affirm the right of five other gentlemen to the seats, upon evidence which they affirm was brought before them. Four others of

the same committee vindicate the certificate of the governor and reaffirm the right of the first named gentlemen upon the same evidence; and he could not decide between these conflicting claims and conflicting reports, and affirm the right of the now sitting members, in the absence of all evidence except the governor's certificate, which certifies the right

of five others. Mr. R. was not excused.

consent.

facts of the case, nor have had an opportunity of
knowing them, and that the entire proceeding vio-
lates all the forms, usages and principles which
should, in their judgment, be observed, they respect-
fully ask to be excused from voting. Mr. H. and
Mr. T. were not excused.

Mr. Campbell, of Tennessee, asked to be excused
from voting on this question. "The evidence upon
which the reports are founded has not been pub-
lished or printed, nor has it bee. read to this house.
I have not seen or heard the evidence, and cannot
decide which set of claimants is entitled to seats. I
understand that the claimants for seats wish to ap:
pear at the bar, by themselves or by counsel, and
show their rights to seats, but the previous question
has been sustained by a majority, which cuts off
the reading of the evidence and the right of the
parties to appear in defence of their claim to seats.
Acting now in a judicial capacity, under the so-
lemn obligation of an oath, I cannot do justice to
my own conscience or to the parties concerned by
giving my vote for or against the resolution now
before the house." Mr. C. was not excused.

Mr. Fillmore appealed to his friends to prefer no
more requests to be excused; they were utterly
vain. Let gentlemen complete their work, and
then answer it to the nation.

Mr. Campbell, of S. C. moved to adjourn; but the
house, by yeas and nays, refused the motion: yeas
75, nays 107.
The question was now, at length, obtained; and
being put upon agreeing to the report of the com-
mittee, (which declares the members now sitting
to have been duly elected, and entitled to seats),

was decided as follows:

YEAS-Messrs. J. Allen, H. J. Anderson, Ather

The chair replied in the affirmative. Mr. Graham, of North Carolina, asked and obtained leave to make a personal explanation in relation to a foul fraud or base forgery which he understood had been practised on his franking privilege. Mr. G. stated that, after the adjournment of this house last night, he had received by mail à highly respectable journal published in Asheville, North Carolina, within his own district, called the Highland Messenger, in which he was surprised and astonished to find the following statement:

"We have more than once taken occasion to ad

vert to the recklessness manifested by political partisans of the present day. Our attention has been called to this subject again by several packages recently coming to this district under the frank of James Graham, representative in congress, containing copies of Dr. Duncan's speech. These packets were no more sent by Mr. Graham than they were sent by us. His name has either been forged, or the packets broken open and the doctor's speech put in them after he sent them to the post office. In either case it evinces a desperation which we would charitably hope is without a parallel in our country's history."

After Mr. Graham had read the above extract, he stated he was well acquainted with the character of the editors of the Highland Messenger, (the rev. Mr. McAnally and Mr. Joshua Roberts). They were both gentlemen of as much veracity and honor as any in North Carolina or North America. One of them Mr. Joshua Roberts, was the clerk of a superior court, and an excellent judge of different hand-writings, and particularly well acquainted with his (Mr. G's) hand-writing. Mr. Roberts at first sight detected and exposed this villanous imposition in his useful paper.

Mr. G. stated that he was

ton, Banks, Beatty, Beirne, Blackwell, Boyd, A. V Brown, A. G. Brown, Burke, W. O. Butler, Bynum, J. Campbell, Carr, Casey, Chapman, Clifford, Coles, Con- generally very careful to guard against imposition, nor, Craig, Crary, Dana, T. Davee, J. Davis, J. W. and rarely franked a bundle of any papers without Davis, Doan, Doig, Dromgoole, Duncan, Earl, East- first examining one of the packages. Mr. Speaker, man, Ely, Fine, Fisher, Floyd, Fornance, Galbraith, (said Mr. G.) I do not believe I ever did, and I Hammond, Hand, John Hastings, Hawkins, J. Hill, know I never intended to send or frank a speech of of N. C. Hillen, Holleman, Holmes, Hopkins, Hubbard, Dr. Duncan's to any human being in my life; and Jackson, Jameson, J. Johnsou, C. Johnson, Nathaniel I now pronounce any and all letters or papers coJones, John W. Jones, Keim, Kemble, Leadbetter, Leonard, Lucas, McCulloh, McKay, Mallory, Marchand, vering copies of Dr. Duncan's speech, under the Medill, Miller, Montanya, Montgomery, S. W. Morris, frank of my name, to be foul frauds, or base forgeNewhard, Parish, Parmenter, Parris, Paynter, Petrikin, ries. This brief explanation is due to myself and Pickens, Prentiss, Ramsey, Reynolds, Rhett, Rives, my constituents, as well as the house and the Edward Rogers, Samuels, Thos. Smith, Starkweather, country. Steenrod, Strong, Sumpter, Swearingen, Sweeny, TayThe commit-lor, F. Thomas, P. F. Thomas, J. Thompson, Turney, Vanderpoel, D. D. Wagener, Watterson, Wick, J. W. Williams, Henry Williams, Worthington-102.

Mr. Rives wished to make a proposal to the house. The chair said it could be done only by general [Loud dissent. Cries of "no, no, sit down, not in order."] Mr. Rives endeavored to proceed, but his voice was drowned in the Babel-like din of sounds.

Mr. Ogle said he wished to vote on his own judg. ment, and not on that of other men. tee were evenly balanced, four against four, until a week or two ago, Mr. P. F. Thomas, of Md. had been added. Mr. O. with all respect for that gen. tleman, was not to be bound by his solitary vote in committee, nor by the report of any committee under Heaven. He must judge for himself. Mr. O. was not excused.

NAYS-Messrs. Botts, Briggs, Carter, Chinn, Chittenden, Mark A. Cooper, Cranson, Fillmore, Goggin, Green, Hawes, James Mason, Morgan, Ogle, Osborne, Pope, Ridgeway, T. Smith, Toland, Thomas W. Wil liams, Joseph L. Williams-22.

So the report was adopted.

The house then, at half past 9 o'clock adjourned. Friday, July 17. The first hour after the meeting of the house was occupied with propositions to amend the journal; a very desultory and protracted conversation was occasioned by motions to amend, and disputes as to how the facts really stood. At length the journal was so far corrected as apparent. ly to satisfy all parties.

Mr. W. Cost Johnson asked to be excused. He thought the whole proceeding fraught with the most alarming evils, and likely to set most pernicious precedent for the future. Whenever high party times occurred, this case would be called up as sanctioning the abuse of power. The rights of a sovereign and patriotic state were involved, and, as a state rights man, he never could yield his assent to such a proceeding. It was not only a violation Mr. Petrikin moved that the house go into comof state rights, but an infringement on every principle of justice and every safeguard of freedom.-mittee of the whole on the state of the union; but Mr. Campbell, of South Carolina, superseded the motion by rising to a question of privilege, and thereupon moved to discharge the committee of elections from the further consideration of the disputed election in the Massachusetts 6th district, there being no evidence whatever before the committee on that subject. Agreed to.

Mr. J. was not excused.

Mr. Fillmore made a report on the Pennsylvania election, concluding with a resolution that Mr. Naylor had been duly elected. Mr. Medill, from a minority of the committee, make a counter-report. Both these reports were laid on the table, and order

Mr. Hawes and Mr. Triplett asked to be excused from voting on the resolution reported by the committee of elections, for the following reasons: 1st. They are not informed of the facts of the case.2d. They have had no opportunity of gaining any information as to the facts of the case. 3d. That every usage of this house, so far as they know, is overturned and violated by the whole proceedings in the case. They state that the only knowledge they have had an opportunity of gaining of the facts of the case is from the reading at the clerk's table of the reports of five of the committee of elec.ed to be printed. Mr. McKay inquired of the chair whether, if they tions in support of the resolution, and four of the committee in opposition to the resolution, both of were laid on the table, the vote of less than twowhich reports are long, both of which take many thirds would avail to take them up for consideraand contradictory positions, both of which reports tion? differ widely in facts and arguments, and both of which refer to testimony which they have neither seen nor had an opportunity of reading, hearing, or considering. That they consider it their duty, in sitting in judgment between the parties claiming seats in this house, that the following proceedings should be observed, to wit: 1st. That the evidence taken by the parties to support their respective claims should be read or printed, so as to afford a fair and reasonable opportunity to each member to understand it. 2d. That the parties should be heard at the bar of the house, by themselves or counsel, in such reasonable manner as to enable them to present the facts and arguments of their In consideration that they neither know the

case,

The chair said that, as they pertained to a question of privilege, a majority could at any time take them from the table.

Mr. Campbell stated that it was his intention to call up these reports on Saturday.

Mr. Fillmore said that was far from his own intention, unless they had previously been printed and laid on the tables of all the members.

Mr. Petrikin inquired whether, as the testimony had long since been printed for the committee, it had not been laid on the tables?

Mr. Campbell explained in reply.

Mr. Botts inquired whether these reports would be attached to each other, so as to go out to the country together?

The house now, on motion of Mr. Petrikin, went again into committee of the whole on the state of the union, and resumed the consideration of the In

dian bill.

Various amendments were proposed and discussed, which occupied the committee till the hour of recess.

Evening session. The committee of the whole on the state of the union, Mr. Hopkins (pro tem.) in in the chair, resumed the consideration of the Indian appropriation bill, the pending question being on the amendment offered by Mr. Jones, of Va. appropriating $36,265 40 for the purpose of carrying into effect the treaty with the Stockbridge and Munsee tribes of Indians, made the 3rd day of September, 1839, and ratified May the 16th, 1840.

A very long and animated debate followed, in which Messsrs. Davis, of Ky. Burnard, Evans, Vanderpoel, Adams, Jones, R. Garland, Biddle, McKay, Rhett, M. A. Cooper, Connor and Mason, of Ohio, participated.

After which, the question was taken, and the amendment was agreed to.

Mr. Bell moved to amend the bill by adding at the end thereof an appropriation of $5,000 for holding a treaty with the Cherokee Indians, (including the different interests and divisions which exist among them). Mr. B. proceeded to address the committee, but, after some time, no quorum being present, the committee rose, and the chairman reported that fact to the house.

A motion to adjourn was made, and, by yeas 26, nays 70, was negatived.

A call of the house was ordered; after which, (a quoruin being present), the house again went into committee, and resumed the consideration of the Indian appropriation bill."

The debate on the amendment was continued at great length; after which, the question was put, but no quorum voted. It was understood, however, that the amendment should be considered as agreed to, (the right being reserved to members to vote upon it in the house).

Several amendments (having reference to private claims) were offered and agreed to.

It was now one o'clock, and the committee being without a quorum, and having reported that fact, various ineffectual motions were made for a call of the house, to adjourn, &c.

And finally, at a quarter before two o'clock, the house adjourned.