elect before the time had arrived for the beginning of his term, and before he had presented himself to be heard upon the subject. The Senate is a continuing body which was organized at the beginning of the Government in 1789, and that organization is to continue, as we fondly hope, until time shall be no more, certainly until the destruction of the American Constitution. It is therefore possible that it might be within the constitutional power of the Senate to determine in advance the right of a Senator to a seat upon this floor, and it would be a violation of all constitutional precedent, and it would be, in my judgment, a violation of the sense of justice and propriety of the Senate and of the American people. The effect, therefore, of this report is simply to remand to the action of the Senate to be taken after the 4th of March without prejudice-without being in the least affected by any action now (on) any question which any person may see fit to raise, and that is all. No prejudice, for no prejudice against any person who may conceive himself entitled to a seat on this floor hereafter will arise or has arisen in consequence of the report of the committee or of the Senate in accepting it. (Congres sional Record, second session Forty-ninth Congress, p. 2474.) THURSDAY, March 3, 1887. Mr. Harrison presented a memorial of the members of the senate and house of representatives of the State of Indiana protesting against the alleged election of David Turpie as a Senator from that State. Ordered, That it lie on the table. [First session-Fiftieth Congress.] TUESDAY, December 6, 1887. The credentials of the following-named Senators having been presented to the Senate, the oaths prescribed by law were administered to them by the President pro tempore, and they took their seats in the Senate: Mr. David Turpie, from the State of Indiana. Mr. Hoar presented a memorial of the committee appointed by the joint convention of the general assembly of the State of Indiana in relation to the election of Hon. David Turpie as United States Senator from that State; which, together with the papers touching said matter on the files of the Senate, was referred to the Committee on Privileges and Elections when appointed. MONDAY, May 14, 1888. Mr. Hoar, from the Committee on Privileges and Elections, to whom were referred sundry resolutions, memorials, etc., in relation to the election of Hon. David Turpie as United States Senator from the State of Indiana, submitted a report (No. 1291), with the recommendation that the committee be discharged from the further consid eration of the subject. TUESDAY, May 15, 1888. On motion by Mr. Hoar that the Committee on Privileges and Elections be discharged from the further consideration of the several resolutions and memorials concerning the election of Hon. David Turpie as United States Senator, After debate, It was determined in the affirmative. [The debate will be found on pp. 4145 to 4147 Cong. Record, 1st sess. 50th Cong.] REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE. IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES. MAY 14, 1888.-Ordered to be printed. Mr. Hoar, from the Committee on Privileges and Elections, submitted the following report: The Committee on Privileges and Elections, to whom were referred certain resolu tions of the joint convention of the two houses of the State of Indiana concerning the election of Hon. David Turpie as United States Senator, and a memorial signed by F. Winter and 17 others, members of the legislature of said State, protesting and remonstrating against the admission of Mr. Turpie as a member of the Senate of the United States from the State of Indiana, and a communication signed by F. Winter and John M. Griffiths in behalf of a committee appointed by the joint convention of said assembly of said State for the purpose of presenting to the Senate of the United States the facts attending the election of David Turpie as aforesaid, have considered the same and respectfully report: Mr. Turpie received a certificate of his election from the governor of Indiana, which constitutes a prima facie title to his seat, and has been admitted thereupon to take the oath. The two houses of the legislature of Indiana, having failed to concur in the appointment of a Senator, met in joint convention, and after sundry ballotings, in which no person had a majority of the votes cast, a ballot was had in which Mr. Turpie received 2 more votes than all others. A quorum of said joint convention and a quorum of each house was present and voted. The proceedings were in all respects regular, and resulted in a valid election of Mr. Turpie, unless the facts which the remonstrants offer to prove constitute a valid objection. They offer to show, first, that, there being a vacancy in the office of lieutenantgovernor, the Hon. Robert S. Robertson was duly elected to fill such vacancy, and thereby became entitled by the constitution and laws of Indiana to preside over the senate; but that, on the meeting of the senate on the 6th day of January, 1887, being the first day of the session of the legislature at which said alleged election of Mr. Turpie took place, one Alonzo G. Smith usurped the office and function of such presiding officer, was supported and maintained in such usurpation by a majority of said body, excluded Mr. Robertson from said office and function, and continued so to preside and so to exclude Mr. Robertson during all the sessions of said senate, including its attendance on said joint convention, until after the said alleged election of Mr. Turpie. Second. That before said alleged election the senate wrongfully, and for the purpose of obtaining a majority for said Turpie in said joint convention, declared two members, who had been duly and lawfully elected members thereof, not entitled to their seats, and declared two other persons, who had not been duly and lawfully elected, to be entitled to such seats, and thereupon seated such persons, and that this was done without right, without evidence, and without hearing or debate; and that said persons so seated thereafter were present and voted for Mr. Turpie in said convention, and that without such votes said Turpie would not have received a majority. It The committee are of opinion that the facts offered, if proved, will not warrant the Senate in declaring the sitting member not entitled to his seat. There can be no doubt that the body in question was the constitutional senate of Indiana. The journals of both houses of the legislature of the State have been submitted to us. appears that the body was recognized as the senate by the governor and by the house of representatives. Statutes, to which its constitutional assent was necessary, were enacted and have become part of the law of the State. It seems to us that, without entering upon the question whether there was a vacancy in the office of lieutenant-governor which Mr. Robertson was duly elected to fill, the recognition of Mr. Smith by a majority of the senate as its lawful presiding officer, and the recognition of the senate as a lawfully-organized body by the other house as well as by all its own members who remained and took part in its legislative proceedings, and by the executive department, require us to consider it as the lawful senate, lawfully organized so far as to be entitled to take part in the joint convention which elected a Senator of the United States. We also think that the judgment of the senate of Indiana as to the title of Messrs. Branahan and McDonald, the two members in question, to their seats is binding upon the Senate of the United States. This body is made by the Constitution the judge of the elections, qualifications, and returns of its members. The senate of Indiana is likewise the judge of the election, qualifications, and returns of its own members. We must determine all questions arising out of the proceeding of the electors. But who sustain the character of electors is to be determined by the legislative body of the State. We can not inquire into the motive which controlled its judgment. In rendering that judgment, whether it shall give a hearing to parties, permit debate, examine witnesses, act upon evidence or without evidence, are matters within its own discretion. If that discretion were exercised in the manner charged by the remonstrants, a majority of the committee think that a great public crime was committed, for which the offenders are responsible to the people of Indiana. But we can not try the ques tion. A majority of the committee do not mean to be understood as now committing ourselves to an opinion upon the question whether the Senate can not refuse to admit to a seat a claimant who owes his election to a legislative body which is itself the result of fraud or crime, which has overcome the true will of the people, even if it have possessed itself of legislative authority, and of the technical evidence of a rightful character, or whether the judgments of such a body as to the title to seats of its individual members are entitled to any respect whatever. If that question shall hereafter unhappily arise it will be dealt with on its own merits. The committee ask to be discharged from the further consideration of the several memorials. [Fiftieth Congress-First session.] DANIEL B. LUCAS vs. CHARLES J. FAULKNER, of West Virginia. December 5, 1887, papers purporting to be the credentials of Daniel B. Lucas, appointed a Senator by the governor of West Virginia, and of Charles J. Faulkner, elected Senator by the legislature of West Virginia, in special session, and also the protest of Mr. Lucas against the administration of the oath to Mr. Faulkner, were presented to the Senate. Objection was made to the admission of the oath to Mr. Faulkner, and the question of his admission was postponed. December 12 the matter was referred to the Committee on Privileges and Elections, which reported on the 14th. The committee found the following facts: The legislature of West Virginia, whose duty it was to elect a Senator for the term beginning March 4, 1887, adjourned without making a choice. The gov ernor was by the State constitution empowered to convene the legislature in special session to transact business mentioned in the call, and no other. March 5 the governor appointed Mr. Lucas in the recess of the legislature, and on the same day issued his proclamation convening the legislature in special session to consider and act upon eight subjects named in the call, no one of which was the election of a United States Senator. The legislature met and duly elected Mr. Faulkner, if it had power to do so. The committee held that the constitution required the legislature to fill the vacancy at its next meeting; that the body convened by the governor's proclamation was the "legislature," and this its next meeting, and that the prohibition of the State constitution must be taken to apply to business transacted under that constitution and not to "duties imposed upon [the legislature] by the supreme authority of the Constitution of the United States." The committee further held that the fact that Mr. Faulkner held a judicial office at the time of his election, and that the State constitution made him, "during his continuance therein, ineligible to any political office," did not invalidate his election, because no State can prescribe any qualification to the office of United States Senator in addition to those declared in the Constitution of the United States." The committee therefore reported that Mr. Faulkner was entitled to the seat. The resolution reported by the committee was agreed to on the same day, the 14th, and Mr. Faulkner appeared, took the oath of office, and took his seat in the Senate. December 20 Mr Faulkner offered a resolution for the compensation of Mr. Lucas for all expenses, etc., as contestant, which was referred to the Committee on Privileges and Elections. That committee reported on the 12th of January, 1888, a resolution to pay Mr. Lucas $1,000 in full of all claims. This resolution was referred to the Committee to Audit and Control Contingent Expenses, which reported it without amendment on the 25th, and on the same day it was agreed to by the SenThe history of the case here given consists of a transcript of the Journal of the Senate (1st sess. 50th Cong.) relating to this subject and the report of the committee. ate. MONDAY, December 5, 1887. The President pro tempore laid before the Senate the credentials of Daniel B. Lucas, appointed a Senator by the governor of the State of West Virginia to fill the vacancy occasioned by the expiration of the term of Johnson M. Camden, March 4, 1887, the legislature of said State having adjourned sine die without having chosen a Senator to fill said vacancy as prescribed by law; which were read. The President pro tempore laid before the Senate the credentials of Charles J. Faulkner, elected a Senator by the legislature of West Virginia, in special session, for the term of six years, commencing March 4, 1887; which were read. * # # # # The President pro tempore laid before the Senate a protest of Daniel B. Lucas against the administration of the oath to Charles J. Faulkner, claiming to be elected Senator from the State of West Virginia. Ordered, That it lie on the table. [A copy of the credentials of Mr. Faulkner, which embody the proclamation of the governor convening the legislature in special session and a transcript of the proceedings of the legislature in relation to the election, are printed on pp. 1 to 3 Cong. Record, 1st sess. 50th Cong. The protest of Mr. Lucas may be found ibid., p. 3, as well as Mr. Faulkner's resignation of the office of judge of the thirteenth judicial circuit.] Mr. Charles J. Faulkner, whose credentials were this day presented, having appeared, Mr. Hoar objected to the administration of the oath to him at present; and On motion by Mr. Hoar, MONDAY, December 12, 1887. Ordered, That the credentials of Mr. Faulkner as a Senator from the State of West Virginia, the memorial of Mr. Lucas, and all other papers on the files of the Senate relating to the title to the seat from the State of West Virginia, be referred to the Committee on Privileges and Elections. WEDNESDAY, December 14, 1892. Mr. Hoar, from the Committee on Privileges and Elections, to whom were referred the credentials of Charles J. Faulkner, the credentials of Daniel B. Lucas, and the protest of Daniel B. Lucas against administering the oath to Charles J. Faulkner as Senator from the State of West Virginia, submitted a report (No. 1), accompanied by the following resolutions; which were considered by unanimous consent, and agreed to: Resolved, That Daniel B. Lucas is not entitled to a seat in the Senate from the State of West Virginia. Resolved, That Charles J. Faulkner has been duly elected Senator from the State of West Virginia for six years, commencing on the 4th day of March, 1887, and that he is entitled to a seat in the Senate as such Senator. Mr. Faulkner appeared, and the oath prescribed by law having been administered to him by the President pro tempore, he took his seat in the Senate. REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE. [The committee consisted of Messrs. Hoar (chairman), Frye, Teller, Evarts, Spooner, Saulsbury, Vance, Pugh, Eustis.] IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES. DECEMBER 14, 1887.-Ordered to be printed. Mr. Hoar, from the Committee on Privileges and Elections, to whom were referred the credentials of Charles J. Faulkner, the credentials of Daniel B. Lucas, and the protest of Daniel B. Lucas against administering the oath to Charles J. Faulkner as Senator from the State of West Virginia, submitted the following report: The Constitution of the United States, Article I, section 3, provides: "The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, chosen by the legislature thereof, for six years; if vacancies happen, by resignation or otherwise, during the recess of the legislature of any State, the executive thereof may make temporary appointments until the next meeting of the legislature, which shall then fill such vacancies. SEC. 4. The times, places, and manner of holding elections for Senators and Representatives shall be prescribed in each State by the legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time, by law, make or alter such regulations, except as to the places of choosing Senators." The Revised Statutes of the United States, Title II, section 14, provide: "The legislature of each State which is chosen next preceding the expiration of the time for which any Senator was elected to represent such State in Congress shall, on the second Tuesday after the meeting and organization thereof, proceed to elect a Senator in Congress." Section 15 prescribes the manner of such election. Section 16 is as follows: "Whenever, on the meeting of the legislature of any State, a vacancy exists in the representation of such State in the Senate, the legislature shall proceed, on the second Tuesday after the meeting and organization, to elect a person to fill such vacancy, in the manner prescribed in the preceding section for the election of a Senator for a full term." The Constitution further provides, Article I, section 5: "Each house shall be the judge of the elections, returns, and qualifications of its own members." Of course the opinion of any other tribunal can have no weigh as an authority in determining any question as to the validity of the election of a Senator. But it may be proper to note that the constitutional authority of Congress to prescribe the time and manner of electing Senators, although it may not exhaust the whole subject, but still leaves in force the regulations of a State, in regard to the same subject, not in conflict with its own, is expressly affirmed by the Supreme Court of the United States in Ex parte Seibold, 100 U. S., 371. The constitution of West Virginia provides that "The legislature shall assemble at the seat of government biennially, and not oftener, unless convened by the governor. The first session of the legislature, after the adoption of this constitution, shall commence on the third Tuesday of November, 1872; and the regular biennial session of the legislature shall commence on the second Wednesday of January, 1875, and every two years thereafter on the same day. (Article VI, section 7.)" Article VII, section 7, is as follows: "The governor may, on extraordinary occasions, convene, at his own instance, the legislature; but, when so convened, it shall enter upon no business except that stated in the proclamation by which it was called together." The term of Mr. Camden as a Senator from West Virginia expired on the 4th day of March, 1887. The regular biennial session of the legislature began on the second Wednesday of January in pursuance of the provisions of the constitution cited. At that session the legislature proceeded to ballot for a successor to Mr. Camden, but no person obtained a majority of the ballots and it adjourned without making a choice. Thereafter, on the 5th day of March, the governor appointed Mr. Lucas, in the recess of the legislature, and issued to him a certificate declaring his appointment as Senator in the Senate of the United States "until the next meeting of the legislature having authority to fill such vacancy." Mr. Lucas accepted the appoint ment. On the same 5th day of March the governor issued the following proclamation: 66 PROCLAMATION. "STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA, "I, E. W. Wilson, governor of the State of West Virginia, under and by virtue of section 7 of article VII of the constitution of said State, which provides that"The governor may, on extraordinary occasions, convene, at his own instance, the legislature; but, when so convened, it shall enter upon no business except that stated in the proclamation by which it was called together' "Do issue this, my proclamation, to convene the legislature of said State, at the seat of government, at Charleston, on the third Wednesday in April, A. D. 1887, to consider and act upon the following subjects of legislative business, to wit: "I. To make appropriations of public money to pay general charges upon the treasury. "II. To make appropriations of public money to pay members of the legislature, and for salaries of the officers of the government, in pursuance of the forty-second section of the sixth article of the constitution. "To protect the public treasury against unnecessary expenditures by "1. Regulating the costs, charges, and proceedings in criminal cases before justices of the peace and circuit courts. "2. Providing for and limiting the allowances for the maintenance of lunatics in jail. "IV. To carry into effect section nine of article XI of the constitution, which provides that "Railroads heretofore constructed, or that may hereafter be constructed, in this State, are hereby declared public highways, and shall be free to all persons for the transportation of their persons and property thereon, under such regulations as shall be prescribed by law, and the legislature shall, from time to time, pass laws applicable to all railroad corporations in the State, establishing reasonable maximum rates of charges for the transportation of passengers and freights, and providing for the correction of abuses, the prevention of unjust discriminations between through and local or way freights and passenger tariffs, and the protection of the just rights of the public, and shall enforce such laws by adequate penalties.' "And to provide for securing such relief to the people of this State as may be had from the act recently passed by Congress entitled 'An act to regulate commerce.' "V. To prohibit railroad companies from carrying or conveying public officers over their roads free of charge, or at a less charge than the usual rate for other persons, and to abolish, absolutely, the free-pass system. "VI. To prohibit railroad companies from carrying or conveying delegates to political conventions over their roads free of charge, or at a less charge than is made for all other such delegates to such conventions, and to define what shall constitute a political convention. "VII. To prohibit the use of money and all other improper, fraudulent, and corrupt means to secure nominations, by political parties, or election to public office. "VIII. To provide for the acceptance and confirmation of the reports of the joint boundary commission on the boundary lines between West Virginia and Pennsylvania." The legislature met in special session, pursuant to said call, and duly elected Mr. Faulkner to fill the existing vacancy in the Senate of the United States, if it had authority so to do. The Constitution of the United States is the supreme authority, and all provisions of the constitution or statutes of any State are void and of no effect unless they can be so construed as not to conflict with its provisions. The Constitution of the United States expressly provides that the vacancy which |