1. A branch of a State legislature having a presiding officer ex officio and a clerk pro tempore, the members being sworn, is "organized" within the meaning of the act regulating the time of electing Senators.-Clagett vs. Dubois, 764. 2. Act of 1866 held designed only to determine when proceedings for the election of Senators should begin and not to require action on the same day regarding every Senator to be elected.-Hart vs. Gilbert, 378.
3. A Senator elected by a joint convention on the third day after the "second Tuesday after its organization," the preceding days being occupied by the elections of Senators to fill existing vacancies, held duly elected.-Hart vs. Gilbert, 378. 4. The fact that a legislature did not proceed on the second Tuesday after notice of a vacancy to vote in each branch to fill the vacancy, held not to deprive the legislature of its right to elect.-Lapham and Miller, 697.
5. The election of a Senator by a duly organized legislature a week before the second Tuesday after it had notice of a vacancy held good, where the legislature was forced to adjourn by constitutional limitation before the second Tuesday was reached.-John W. Smith, 996, 999, 1001.
6. A legislature elected previous to the expiration of a Senatorial term, though it does not convene nor organize until after the expiration of the term, is the legislature "chosen next preceding the expiration."-Charles H. Bell, 26; Henry W. Blair, 36; Norwood vs. Blodgett, 389; John A. Henderson, 104. 7. A Senator elected by a legislature, at the first session after its organization, admitted, though that legislature had another session before the term for which he was elected began.-Reynolds vs. Hamilton, 381.
8. A legislature convened in special session by proclamation of the governor, under a power to convene the legislature for purposes mentioned in the proclamation, is bound to elect a Senator to fill a vacancy, though that is not one of the specified objects of the proclamation.-Lucas vs. Faulkner, 722.
9. A Senator elected by a joint convention composed of a majority of all the members of the legislature, but not of a majority of the members of each house, held duly elected, the joint convention being a body distinct from either house, with a quorum of its own.-Davidson vs. Call, 806.
10. A committee report that in the absence of any law, State or National, a joint meeting of the two houses of the legislature may prescribe that a plurality vote shall elect a Senator was reversed by the Senate.-John P. Stockton, 322. 11. An election at an adjourned meeting of a convention composed of a minority of the members of one house of the State legislature, but of a majority of the mem- bers of the two houses, held valid. In the absence of a State or Federal law regulating election of Senators, the Senate declined to hold that an election must be participated in by each house in its organized capacity.-Fitch and Bright, 244, 254.
12. A Senator elected by a joint convention comprising a majority of the members of the legislature, but not a majority of each house, and in which one house refuses to take part, admitted.-James B. Eustis, 481. 13. A Senator elected by a joint convention comprising less than a quorum of one house, but a majority of all the members of both houses, admitted.-Spofford vs. Kellogg, 567.
14. A majority of the whole legislature not necessary to an election, a quorum of each house being present and a majority of that quorum actually voting for the members elected.-Lapham and Miller, 697; William Lorimer (first), 1004. 15. A concurrent majority of each house of the legislature not necessary for an election of a Senator under the constitution or the laws of Pennsylvania.-Simon Cameron, 264.
16. An election by a convention composed of a majority of one house and less than half of the members of the other, held not valid, although the claimant had been elected by a majority of all the members of the State legislature, but not by a joint session of the two houses, for one has adjourned for the day.—James Harlan, 235.
17. A report made in favor of claim of person elected by a majority of the members certified by the proper authority as duly elected, though by less than a majority of all the members to be chosen.-Corbin vs. Butler, 637.
See, also, STATES IN REBELLION.
1. Right of acting governor to take part in proceedings and vote while the two houses of the legislature are in joint session for the purpose of electing a Senator, affirmed.-Henry A. du Pont, 818.
2. Right of acting governor to appoint a Senator in absence of governor, considered but not decided.-Maginnis vs. Clark, 143.
See, also, LEGISLATURE.
LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR.
1. A Senator appointed in anticipation of a vacancy, who was not entitled to his seat.-James Lanman, 5.
2. A Senator appointed during a recess of the legislature and in anticipation of a vacancy, entitled to the seat.-Uriah Tracy, 3; Ambrose H. Sevier, 7; Horace Chilton, 48.
3. A Senator elected by legislature in anticipation of a vacancy caused by the resig- nation of a Senator to take effect in the future, admitted.—James A. Hemenway, 993.
See, also, APPOINTMENTS BY EXECUTIVES OF STATES. TERM OF SENATORS APPOINTED.
APPOINTMENTS BY EXECUTIVES OF STATES.
List of appointments to March 4, 1913, 146-156.
1. A Senator appointed to fill a vacancy after a session of the legislature which failed to fill the vacancy, not entitled to his seat.-Kensey Johns, 1; James Lanman, 5; Samuel S. Phelps, 16; Lee Mantle, 52; A. C. Beckwith, 83; John B. Allen, 85; Henry W. Corbett, 89; Matthew S. Quay, 107.
2. A Senator appointed to fill a vacancy at the beginning of a term which the legis lature had had no opportunity to fill, entitled to his seat.-Charles H. Bell, 26; Henry W. Blair, 36.
3. A Senator appointed in anticipation of a vacancy not entitled to the seat.-James Lanman, 5.
4. A Senator appointed in anticipation of a vacancy caused by the resignation of a Senator to take effect in the future, admitted.—Horace Chilton, 48.
5. The title of a Senator elected to fill a vacancy caused by the resignation of a Senator to take effect in the future can not be defeated by the death of the resigning Senator before the date fixed for resignation.-Archibald Dixon, 13.
6. A Senator appointed during a recess of the legislature and in anticipation of a vacancy entitled to the seat.-Uriah Tracy, 3.
7. A vacancy occurring in consequence of a Senator from a newly admitted State drawing a short term may be filled by executive appointment before the vacancy occurs, no session of the legislature intervening.—Ambrose H. Sevier, 7.
See, also, RESIGNATION.
TERM OF SENATORS APPOINTED.
APPROPRIATIONS TO PAY COMPENSATION.
ARGUMENTS BY CONTESTANTS.
BAILEY, JOSEPH W., SENATOR FROM TEXAS.
1. Remarks of, in case of Reed Smoot, 985.
2. Remarks of, in case of James A. Hemenway, 993.
BAYARD, JAMES A., SENATOR FROM DELAWARE.
Remarks of, in case of James Harlan, 235.
BEVERIDGE, ALBERT J., SENATOR FROM INDIANA.
Remarks of, in case of John W. Smith, 1000.
1. To deprive a Senator of his seat on the charge of bribery it must be shown (a) that the person elected participated in one or more acts of bribery or attempted bribery or sanctioned or encouraged the same; (b) that by bribery or corrupt practices enough votes were obtained for him to change the result of the elec- tion.-Henry B. Payne, 700; William Lorimer (first), 1004.
2. Charges that an election was procured by bribery or corrupt practices investigated, and held not to be sustained by proof.-Pomeroy and Caldwell, 426; Powell Clayton, 444; George E. Spencer, 611; La Fayette Grover, 661; Marcus A. Hanna, 878; William Lorimer (first), 1002, 1025; Isaac Stephenson, 1114, 1155.
3. An election procured by bribery, held by a committee to be void.—William A. Clark, 906.
4. Charges of bribery and corruption in the election of a Senator investigated and found that not enough votes were influenced thereby to affect the result, and that the Senator did in no way authorize the acts proved.-John J. Ingalls, 692; William Lorimer (first), 1002, 1014.
5. A committee's holding that where certain members of a legislature electing a Sena- tor were shown to have received money, yet not for the purpose of electing a Senator, the election was valid, not upheld by the Senate.-William Lorimer (second), 1097.
6. Procurement of advertising space or editorial comment in the newspapers, or serv- ices of men to speak either publicly or personally, upon payment of money by or on behalf of a candidate not held to be bribery. (1912.)-Isaac Stephenson, 1122, 1131.
7. Committee finding charges of corruption not sustained in a case, is divided on question of recognition of proceedings connected with the direct primary as a part of the election of a Senator by the legislature as provided for in the Con- stitution.—Isaac Stephenson, 1126, 1134.
8. Charge that three legislators were fraudulently influenced to absent themselves from voting for a Senator making election invalid, not sustained.—Stephenson, 1125. 9. Expenditure of $107,000 in a primary campaign, in the absence of a State or Federal law limiting amount of expenditures by candidates, criticized by a committee but not held sufficient to establish corruption allegations.-Stephenson, 1126, 1133. 10. The allegation of mere rumors of bribery and indefinite allegations of corruption not sufficient to cause the Senate or its committees to investigate the election of a Senator.-Lapan and Miller, 697, 698; Watson and Chilton, 1159, 1164. 11. Investigation of conduct by special committee of Senate accorded Senator who was indicted by a Federal grand jury for alleged violation of the laws of the United States but discharged by judge without the cause being heard on its merits on the ground that the date of the offenses charged was prior to his taking the oath as a Senator. Committee finds charges of misconduct unsus- tained.-Charles H. Dietrich, 987.
See, also, CORRUPTION. EXPULSION.
BROWN, ALBERT G., SENATOR FROM MISSISSIPPI.
Remarks of, in case of James Shields, 270.
BURROWS, JULIUS C., SENATOR FROM MICHIGAN.
1. Remarks of, in case of Henry A. du Pont, 866. 2. Remarks of, in case of Matthew S. Quay, 129. 3. Remarks of, in case of John W. Smith, 996.
4. Remarks of, in case of James A. Hemenway, 994.
CAFFERY, DONELSON, SENATOR FROM LOUISIANA.
Remarks of, in case of Henry W. Corbett, 92.
CHANDLER, WILLIAM E., SENATOR FROM NEW HAMPSHIRE.
1. Remarks of, in case of William N. Roach, 810.
2. Remarks of, in case of Ady v. Martin, 813.
CHILTON, WILLIAM E., SENATOR FROM WEST VIRGINIA.
Remarks of, in case of Watson and Chilton, 1160.
1. Burden of proof of citizenship rests on claimant to seat.-Albert Gallatin, 157. 2. The certificate of a governor of a State that a person elected a Senator was a citizen
of the State held sufficient, no term of residence or other qualifications being prescribed by the constitution or laws of the State.-Stanley Griswold. 174. 3. The election of an alien by birth, naturalized October 21, 1840, and elected a Sen- ator January 13, 1849, held void, he not having been a citizen of the United States for the time required, at the commencement of the term for which he was elected.-James Shields, 218.
4. A person of African blood whose right to a seat in the Senate was contested on the ground that he had not been nine years a citizen in 1870, admitted.-H. R. Revels, 370.
5. An Army officer born in Maine, who had some effects in his father's possession there and had visited there, but owned no land and had no house in the State, elected from a State where he had held a military command for a short time. and where he had declared his intention of residing, admitted to his seat against the report of the committee.-Adelbert Ames, 375.
1. Cases referred to the Committee on Privileges and Elections. (See Introduction xxvii.)
2. Investigation of Senator's election made by committee of the Senate made up of members of the Committee on Privileges and Elections.-William Lorimer (second), 1030. 3. Investigation of charges against Senator made by special committee appointed by President pro tempore of the Senate.-Stanley Matthews, 670; Charles H. Dietrich, 987.
CLINGMAN, THOMAS L., SENATOR FROM NORTH CAROLINA.
Remarks of, in case of Louis T. Wigfall, 1192.
1. A Senator reimbursed from the contingent fund for the expenses of defending his title to his seat.-Sykes vs. Spencer, 611, 633; John J. Ingalls, 692, 696; Corbin vs. Butler, 637, 660; Ady vs. Martin, 812, 816; Addicks vs. Kenney, 875, 877; Nathan B. Scott, 888, 904.
2. A Senator reimbursed by appropriation for necessary expenses in defending his title to his seat.-Spofford vs. Kellogg, 567, 607; Clark, Maginnis vs. Sanders, Power, 727, 760; Clagett vs. Dubois, 764, 804; Reed Smoot. 986.
3. A claimant for a seat refused compensation and mileage.-Segar and Underwood, 310, 313; Sykes vs. Spencer, 611, 630.
4. A resolution to defray expenses of those prosecuting a protest against right of a Senator to his seat tabled.-Reed Smoot, 986.
5. Mileage paid from the contingent fund to claimants of seats. Committee on con- tingent fund, however, reports that it has not the power to pass claims for mileage made in behalf of claimants not Members of Congress.-Fishback, Baxter, and Snow, 298, 304.
6. Contestants allowed expenses for the prosecution of their claims.-Segar and Underwood, 310, 314; Ray vs. Mc Millen, 481, 535; Spofford vs. Kellogg, 567, 607; Thos. C. Manning, 608; Corbin vs. Butler, 637, 660; Lucas vs. Faulkner, 722, 726; Clark, Maginnis vs. Sanders and Power, 727, 760; Clagett vs. Dubois, 764, 804; Davidson vs. Call, 806, 808; Lee Mantle, 52, 81; Asahel C. Beckwith, 83, 84; John B. Allen, 85, 87; Ady vs. Martin, 812, 816; Addicks vs. Kenney, 875, 877; Henry A. du Pont, 874; Nathan B. Scott, 888, 904; Maginnis vs. Clark, 143, 144.
7. Compensation paid contestants from the date of election to the decision of their cases.-Whitley and Farrows vs. Hill and Miller, 343, 369.
8. Contestants paid mileage and compensation from the beginning of the term for which election was claimed to the decision of the case.-Norwood vs. Blodgett, 389, 394; Ransom vs. Abbott, 396, 424; Sykes vs. Spencer, 630.
9. Contestants paid mileage and compensation from the beginning of the session to the settlement of the claim.- Yulle vs. Mallory, 223, 227; Stanton vs. Lane, 276, 283; Mc Millen vs. Pinchback, 538, 564.
10. Contestants paid mileage and compensation from the presentation of their creden- tials to the decision of the case.-Potter vs. Robbins, 179, 181; Hart vs. Gilbert, 378, 380.
11. A Senator admitted to seat paid from contingent fund mileage at the rate allowed for attendance at the session.-Chas. H. Bell, 26, 34.
12. A Senator for whom an appropriation had been proposed to meet his expenses incurred in defense of his seat in the Senate asked to have it rejected.—William Lorimer (first), 1025.
13. An amendment to a deficiency bill granting a certain sum of money to a Senator whose election had been declared invalid not acted upon before adjourn- ment.-William Lorimer (second), 1113.
14. Compensation of Senators from newly admitted States does not begin until the admission of the State - James Shields, 267, 271; Adelbert Ames, 375, 377.
15. A Senator appointed for a term expiring on the date of resignation of a Senator, deceased before the date of his resignation was reached, received compensation to the date of admission of the Senator elected to fill the vacancy caused by resignation.-Archibald Dixon, 13, 15.
16. A Senator appointed to fill a vacancy, who claimed the right to sit after the legis- lature had met and failed to fill the vacancy, received compensation and mileage to the date of the decision by the Senate.-Samuel S. Phelps, 16, 22.
17. A Senator elected to fill a vacancy caused by the resignation of a Senator who had never taken his seat received compensation from date of the beginning of the term.-Ransom vs. Abbott, 396.
Extracts from Constitution relating to election and qualification of Senators. (See Introduction, xx.)
1. Each House of Congress shall be the judge of the election, return, and qualification of its Members. Opinions of committees that Senate sits in judicial capacity and that power should be exercised in accordance with known principles of law.-Ransom vs. Abbott, 397, 406; Henry A. du Pont 874; William Lorimer (first) 1016; William Lorimer (second) 1061.
2. Views of committees that Senator may be deprived of seat although he may have done no acts of which a court of justice can take cognizance.-John Smith, 1170; Reed Smoot, 931.
3. The Senate refused to exclude a Senator for alleged disqualifications other than those mentioned in the Constitution -Reed Smoot, 931.
« PreviousContinue » |