duced by the contending claimants, and of deciding which possessed the prima facie evidence; but the House could not, in his opinion, until after its or ganization, go behind the returns and purge the polls, to ascertain who had a majority of the popular vote. Congress had now only the parliamentary powers necessary for its organization. Mr. N. gave it as his opinion that the New Jersey membors had not the power of voting, till their right to the seals they claimed was decided in their favor. In this opinion, be considered himself sustained by parliamentary law, and parliamentary usage, and in support of it, he referred to the resolution introduced last winter by the CHAIR. While he believed that it was the duty of the House to enforce the laws and Constitution of New Jersey, be, at the same time, believed that the New Jersey members should not vote until these laws were enforced.

Mr. BLACK of Georgia begged leave to occupy the attention of the House for a short time. Before he proceeded, he owed, he said, an apology to the House, and particularly to the gentleman from Maryland, [Mr. JOHNSON,] for the manner in which he, for the first time, presented himself to its notice. He meant no disrespect to any body here. He only claimed the right of himself and his colleagues to be heard, when other gentlemen were wandering from the incidental question before them, speaking on the merits of the maiu question. He only meant to go so far as to say that any gentleman who spoke on the question might be mista. ken; and he would leave it to the House, if all the gentlemen who spoke last, had not gone into the merits of the main question-and he would ask, further, if he was wrong in desiring that the State of Georgia should be heard.

He desired, at this time, to exhibit the position in which, as a member from the State of Georgia, he stood on that floor. It was true that his credentials had not been read; it was true that there was no man here from Georgia contesting his right to his seat; but he did not know how soon it might be contested, if the precedent gentlemen sought to introduce should be established.

He understood the question then before the House to be whether the gentleman from Ohio should be, permitted to go on with his evidence. If that was the question he was prepared to meet it. Laying all other matters aside, and stripping it of all disguise, he was prepared to answer distinctly to this body in the negative. Shall we (said Mr. B.) hear evidence on the one side or the other before we are constitutionally capable of acting on it? Will you hear the merits of the case, before you are in a condition to decide upon it? This was a question of high concern to the country-a question which involved the constitutional rights of the States, and citizens of States; and it was propounded, to whom? To an assemblage of citizens merely-to men who, though they may hereafter be Representatives in the Congress of the United States, have not only not been sworn in as such, but have not even presented the prima facie evidence of their right to be here. Admitting, said Mr. B. that there were Representatives, who knows the fact, but those gentlemen themselves who have their credentials in their pockets? Admit that we have no other contest but that in regard to the seats of the members from New Jersey. I put it to your wisdom, sir, whether we are organized, in accordance with the Constitution and the law, and whether we can take cognisance of any matter, either in our legislative or judicial capicity, until we are so? If we are to arrive at that point of our legislative existence, at which our powers as members of the General Government begin, we must take the only practical course, ani that is the usual and ordinary one heretofore pursued by this House. The only way is for the CLERK to call the roll of the members of the House, beginning if he pleases with the State of Maine, and going on in geographical order, until the whole roll is completed; then the members must be sworn. There is no other power that can seule this question but the House of Representatives; and the Constitution gives it to that House alone. What is a House of Representatives, inthe meaning of the Constiution? Members chosen every two years by the citizens of the States? No-you must go farther; you must have a majority, and the

members must take the oath to support the Constitution, and then proceed to organize the body before it can be called a House of Representatives.

We have been here seven days, wasting the time and money of the nation, and have not arrived at the only material point-that of organiza. tion. All the debate that has hitherto occurred, was idle and unprofitable. He himself was now speaking by the mere courtesy of the House, and until, said he, we arrive at the point of organization, all our talk will be mere talk. In order that we may arrive at that point, permit me to address myself to the majority. It is said that one of the political parties of the day has a majority on this floor; if that be the truth, the whole responsibility for the waste of time and waste of money of the nation will rest upon them. Go on, therefore, I beseech you, gentleinen of the majority, to organize this body-to put it in such a state of constitutional existence as will enable it to decide upon the questions thus prematurely put before it. I call upon that majority to reflect what may be the opinion enter ained of them if they exclude these five New Jersey members from the fear that if they are admittedthey may not be able to elect a Speaker of their party. Go on then gentlemen to organize-admit these men to their seats; and if an Opposition Speaker is elected by their votes, the election may be undone to-morrow. Mr. B. said he bad as yet only spoken on the preliminary question, and what might be his opinions, and what his votes, in regard to the ultimate right of the claimants to the seats from New Jersey, he was prepared when that question should come properly before them to do what law and justice required. After the House should be organized, he was willing to open that case

he would be willing to hear the evidence, and to decide who are the rightful Representatives from the State of New Jersey. He would be willing to examine the facts as to who had the majority of the popular vole, and to accord the seats to hose who should be found to have it.

Mr. UNDERWOOD believed that the question before the House was, whether the papers the gen. tleman from Ohio proposed to have read as a part of his speech, should be read or not. He was against the reading of them, as well as against the reading of the papers which his worthy colleague wished to have read as counteracting testimony, and his objections were founded on the simple reason that there was no tribunal as yet constituted to decide cn them. It seemed to him that this discuss on had been carried too far.

The gentleman with whom he acted had acted throughout from principle. We have shown, said he, that if you refuse to give the contested seats to those who hold the regular commissions, you are out at sea without chart of compass. The House could not, until organized, go behind the regular commissions of the State of New Jersey. At present, however, the whole and sole question should be, How shall we proceed to an organization of the body? On this subject he wished to make a few remarks before he moved the previous question, (which he should presently do,) and he wished to suggest some mode of action after he did call for it. He trusted that he held in his hand a resolution which would relieve the House from every difficulty, and which he also trusted would meet the approbation of a majority of those present. He did not pretend to say that his plan was the best that could be offered; but he would cheerfully surrender it to any better. We have already, said he, expended twenty thousand dollars of the people's money to no purpose, while we have been consuming time in use less debate; and what is worse, we have stood in the way of the interests of the public, by preventing the annual message of the President, on the condition of the country, from going before them. Let us, then, said he, no longer waste time in discussion, but proceed at once to the organization of the House, for the despatch of the public business. My plan, then, said Mr. U. is to move the previous question on all questions before the House, and then to submit the resolution I hold in my hand to the following effect: The Clerk shall again commence calling the roll of members, beginning with the State of Maine,

and going on geographically through each State, until he comes to a name that shall be objected to; and when that is the case he shall pass over that name, and proceed to call all the rest, passing over such as are objected to. He did not care whether the CLERK, when he came to New Jersey, called the names of Mr. AYCRIGG and his associates, or Mr. DICKERSON and his associates. The effect would be the same, as he was to pass over all the names to which objection shou'd be made. The CLERK, then, would go on calling the roll until he called the names of all the members whose seats were not con'ested, and when a quorum was thus formed, it should then decide upon the credentials of all those whose seats were contested. After that, said Mr. U. we shall then go on to elect a Speaker, when some member present, having administered the oath to him, he will administer it to all the rest, and we shall then be an organized body, competent to the transaction of the public business. Mr. U. concluded by moving the previous question on the reading of the documentary testimony called for by Mr. DUNCAN.

The demand for the previous question was seconded by the House, and the main question was ordered to be put.

The main question was then taken by tellers Messrs. FRANCIS THOMAS and TILLINGHAST acting as such.

Which main question was, whether the gentle. man from Ohio should be permitted to read the documentary testimony.

Which question was decided in the affirmative, ayes 106. nays 101.

The CLERK then proceeded to read the testimony, and having commenced the reading of the proceedings of the Privy Council on the Millville and South Amboy polls,

Mr. PROFFIT objected to the further reading, and asked if the paper now being read was not brought and placed on file in the Clerk's office on Saturday last. He saw it himself handed to the CLERK on Saturday last by one of the gentlemen from New Jersey. He objected to its reading and move that it be thrown under the table.

Mr. DUNCAN hoped the CHAIRMAN Would order the reading to go on without interruption.

The CHAIR said the decision of the House, just made, allowed the gentleman to read all the documents on file.

The CLERK then went on with the reading of the documents until he finished; when

Mr. DUNCAN observed that he felt as anxious a desire to organize the House, and place themselves in a condition to transact the public busininess as any member on that floor. He heard the suggestions of the gentleman from Kentucky, and was pleased with them; and if assured that these resolutions could be adopted without giving rise to a long debate, he would yield his right to the floor to allow them to be offered Without some such understanding, however, he would not yield the floor.

Mr. MERCER observed that the gentleman had no right to make such compromise with the House. He, for his part, could not agree to it; and further, he did not intend to vote for the resolutions of the gentleman from Kentucky.

Mr. DUNCAN. Then I withdraw my offer. After which, Mr. D. gave way for a motion for adjournment, which was moved and carried; The House then adjourned till to-morrow, at 12 o'clock.

IN SENATE,

TUESDAY, December 10, 1839. Mr. ALLEN, from the committee appointed to wait upon the President, reported that they had performed that duty; and the President informed them that he had communications of an Executive character to make.

Mr. LINN gave notice that, at the earliest day in which it would be in order to do so, he would ask leave to bring in a bill for the occupation of the Oregon Territory.

A message was received from the President of the United States.

The Senate went into Executive business,
And then adjourned.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

TUESDAY, December 10, 1839.

At 12 o'clock, by the House clock, the CHAIR called the House to order, and stated that the question pending was upon the appeal taken by Mr. VANDERPOEL from the decision of the CHAIR, which dec son was, that Messrs. AYCRIGG, HALSTED, &C. of New Jersey, were entitled to vote.

The CHAIR announced that Mr. DUNCAN of Ohio was entitled to the floor upon this questionnot having concluded his remarks on a former day.

Mr. DUNCAN not appearing in his seat,

Mr. WISE rose and said, if the gentleman from Obio [Mr. DUNCA] was in the House he would not do what he was about to do; but if the gentleman was not in the House he would now move the previous question.

Mr. DROMGOOLE stated that there was a difference in the time between the House clock and gentlemen's timepieces, and he hoped his colleagues would wait a few minutes to see if the gentleman from Ohio would not come in.

Mr. WISE thought perhaps that the absence of the gentleman from Ohio was intentional, with a view of permitting the question to be taken; but if any gentleman would inform him that the gentleman from Ohio wished to address the House, he would wait with pleasure. In order that the gentleman might have an opportunity to come in, he hoped the CHAIR would leave the question to lie over a few minutes, or, if gentlemen requested it, he would withdraw the motion for the present, and move it afterwards.

Mr. JENIFER inquired of the gentleman from Virginia if it was his intention to move the preVous question immediately after the gentleman from Ohio had finished his speech, so that there might be no opportunity to reply to him; first to permit the gentleman to make a speech, and then move it to prevent its being answered?

Mr. WISE. I tell the honorable gentleman that I intend to move the previous question every time that I get the chance.

Mr. JENIFER. Then I now demand the previous question, for, if the gentleman is allowed to make a speech, the opportunity ought to be given to re ly to it.

Mr. WISE hoped the CHAIR would pause a few moments until gentlemen's watches come up to the House time.

Mr. DROMGOOLE. Is it in order to move a call of the House?

Mr. WISE. There is no House to call. Mr. DROMGOOLE. If there is no House, gentlemen ought to be solemnly called upon to be here to form a House.

Mr MERCER said his own impression was that no injustice would be done to the gentleman from Ohio by moving the previous question, as there would be a dozen other questions to come up upon which the gentleman could finish his specch.

The CHAIR stated the course of proceeding on a call of the House, namely: The roll was called over and the absentees noted; and in the present case, if the roll was to be called, the original question of difficulty would arise as to who should be called.

Mr. DROMGOOLE. Then this will bring the House to the question, which the House itself must eventually decide, as to who are its members.

Mr. CHINN then rose, and, walking towards the CLERK'S table, said there had been a great deal of difficulty in determining who were really menbrs of this House, which had determined him as to the course which ought to be pursued. Sir, (said Mr. C.) I hold in my hand the authority by which I come here to represent the people of my State. That authority I now present to the CHAIR, and demand to be enrolled as a member from the State of Louisiana; and I further propose, in the discharge of my duty as a Representative, to give in my vote for Speaker of the House. If the vote is to be by ballot, there is my ballot, [handing up the ticket;] if viva voce, I vote for JonN BELL of Ten

Ressee.

Mr. DROMGOOLE. Has not the gentleman's name been enrolled before?

Mr. CHINN. No: it has neither been enrolled nor called by the CLERK.

Mr. WISE. It is now past twelve o'clock by the Administration time, and that must be right. I therefore now move the previous question.

A call of the house was demanded by seve→ ral gentlemen.

The CHAIR stated that the roll of members had not been completed; therefore, a call of the House could not be made.

Tellers were then called for, and Messrs. CARTER of Tennessee, and GRIFFIN, were appointed tellers by the CHAIR.

The House then divided, and the previous question was seconded-ayes 110, noes 72.

The question then recuried on the question, "Shall the main question be now ru?"

Messrs. WORTHINGTON 2nd TALIAFERRO Were appointed tellers, and the main question was or dered to be put--ayes 110, noes 48.

Mr. WORTHINGTON stated that three of the New Jersey members had voted on this question. [Mr. DUNCAN now appeared in the House.] Mr. SMITH of Maine rose and stated, that the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. DUNCAN] was now in his seat, and he asked whether he should not now be permitted to proceed.

[Loud cries of "order!" "order!" "order!"] Mr. DUNCAN. I put a question of order to the CHAIR.

[Loud and repeated cries of "order!" "order!" "order!"]

The question then recurred on the main ques tion

The CIIAIR then stated the main question in substance as follows: Upon a motion to lay the resolution of the gentleman from Virginia on the table, the vote was about being taken by tellers. One of the tellers inquired who were entitled to vote from New Jersey, and the CHAIR had decided that those members holding the Governor's certificate were entitled to vote. From this decision an appeal to the House had been taken by the gentleman from New York. The question now was, "Shall the decision of the CHAIR stand as the judgment of the House?"

The House then divided; Messrs. WORTHINGTON and TALIAFERRO acting as tetlers; and the vote was-ayes 108, noes 114.

So the decision of the CHAIR was reversed. Mr. WORTHINGTON stated that there were four members voting who hold the Governor's certificate.

A number of persons called out, "How many were voting who hold the certificates of the Secretary of State?" and Mr. CURTIS answered "four." Mr. SMITH of Maine. It is no matter. It don't change the result.

The CHAIR then stated that it would be for the meeting to decide who should be called as members from the State of New Jersey.

Mr. RHETT inquired of the CHAIR if the question did not now recur on the motion made by him to lay the resolution of the gentleman from Virginia on the table?

The CHAIR stated that that would be the question if there was no other question in the way; but the question now was, who should be counted from the State of New Jersey, the decision of the CHAIR having been reversed.

Mr. RHETT asked if the question was not precisely this: A motion had been made by himself to lay the resolution of the gentlemen from Virginia on the table. Upon a division on that que tion, the CHAIR had decided that the membersic New Jersey having the Governor's certificate were to be counted. From that decision an appeal had been taken to the House; and the House had reversed the decision of the CHAIR. Then he asked if the House would not come back to the original motion to lay on the table?

Mr. WISE asked if, when the House had excluded one set of gentlemen irem New Jersey from Voting, it had not excluded all from that State from voting. It had excluded those gentlemen holding the Governor's certificate from voting. Now was it the intention of gentlemen to permit these persons holding the certificate of the Secretary of State to vote?

"No," "no," "no," from several Administration members.

Mr. DROOMGCOLE said all difficulty might now be avoided, by going on as the CLERK had proposed in the first instance, without counting any of the disputed gentlemen from New Jersey.

Mr. WISE. This was the decision of the CLERK, but was it the decision of the House? Let us altempt to progress as we may, this ghost of disorganization will rise up before us, and we will then have to decide who shall vote.

The CHAIR would here remark to the gentleman from South Carolina, [Mr. RHETT,] that it would be impossible for him to put the question upon laying the resolution of the gentleman from Virginia on the table, until it was determined by the House who should vote. It would be for the House to decide for themselves who should be called; but, said he, the State of New Jersey cannot be deprived of a representation on this floor, and it shall not be, so long as I stand in this chair.

[Here there was some little applause from the galleries.]

Mr. WISE. I move the previous question on the decision of the CHAIR.

Mr. THOMAS of Maryland suggested a mode of proceeding without difficulty. We ought to endeavor to get along without difficulty, until it could be no longer avoided, and then it would be time enough to decide upon this question. Let the vote be taken on the motion to lay on the table, by tellers; and if the fact of any portion of the members from New Jersey voting should not change the result, let the decision of the question be announced without raising this question; but if, by their votes, the result is changed, then it will be time enough to bring up this question as to who shall vote. He threw this out as a suggestion to the House.

Mr. WISE called for the regular order of proceedings. The CHAIR had made his decision, and he (Mr. W.) had moved the previous question upon it. Then he demanded that the regular order of proceedings might be observed. Mr. BRIGGS. On what question does the gentleman move the previous question?

The CHAIR said the gentleman had moved the previous question on the motion to lay on the table. Mr. WISE. No, sir. I understood the CHAIR to make a decision as to who should vote, an upon that decision I moved the previous question.

The CHAIR then again stated the question as he had stated it before, and concluded by saying that the House had reversed his decision; but it had not determined who should be counted from New Jersey, and he could not pat the question to lay on the table until the question as to who should vote from New Jersey should first be decided.

Messrs. BRIGGS, TILLINGHAST, and WISE, all rose and addressed the CHAIR. Half the members of the House were standing up.

Mr. SERGEANT rose and said there were so many members on the floor, and so much neise in the hall, that it was impossible for gentlemen to tell what was doing. He hoped members would take their seats.

Mr. BRIGGS then rose and stated his impressions as to the question before the House. A motion had been made to lay the resolution of the gentleman from Virginia on the table. On that question tellers were appointed; and when the House was about diviling, one of the tellers inquired who he should count from the State of New Jersey. The CHAIR decided that the tellers should count the members from that State who had the Governor's certificates. From this decision an appeal had been taken, and the House had reversed the decision of the CHAIR. Then, he apprehended, they stood precisely where they did when this appeal was taken; and the question now would be upon the motion to lay on the table; and he thought the proper course now would be for the tellers to count all who passed through, and if any of the disputed members should vote, let them report that fact to the House. He hoped that the CHAIR would direct the tellers to count all who passed through. Mr. SALTONSTALL hoped that no such direction would be given.

The CHAIR said he had made his decision

that decision had been reversed; and it would now be for the House to decide who should represent the State of New Jersey.

Mr. TILLINGHAST thought the CHAIR ought not to put the question on the motion to lay on the table until the House had decided who should vote from the State of New Jersey. The appeal from the decision had been sustained, and it had been sustained, if we looked at the argument upon it, upon two grounds. One was that the matter was a proper subject for the House to determine, and the other was that the decision was incorrect, whether by the CHAIR or the House.

The

Mr. TURNEY rose to a point of order. question, as he understood it, was to lay the resolution of the gentleman from Virginia on the table; and the question to lay on the table, according to the rules, was not debatable.

The CHAIR said that the question as to who were to represent the State of New Jersey must first be decided, before the question to lay on the table come up.

Mr. SMITH of Maine said that the CHAIR had directed that the gentlemen from New Jersey were entitled to vote. An appeal had been taken from that decision, and it had been reversed, and the gentleman from Rhode Island [Mr. TILLINGHAST] had attempted to give the reasons for this vote of the House; but he would tell the gentleman that the strongest reason which operated upon him, was the 34th rule of the House. He thought the House had a right to decide under that rule, when gentlemen were directly, personally, and immediately interested, that they should not vote. He believed that many other gentlemen besides himself had voted against the decision of the CHAIR in consequence of this rule.

Mr. McKAY moved that none of the disputed members from New Jersey be permitted to vote until the question was decided.

Mr. GRAVES rose to a question of order. His point was this: there was a question before the House, and the previous question had been moved upon it; therefore, no gentleman had the right to bring up a separate and independent proposition until that question was disposed of.

The CHAIR said the previous question could not be put until this question as to who should represent the State of New Jersey should first be decided.

Mr. McKAY then moved that neither set of members from New Jersey shall vote until the question who shall vote from the State of New Jersey? shall be first decided by the House. He contended that this was the proper course to be pursued, and read an extract from Hatzell in support of his position. It was the uniform practice in the British Parliament, when seats were contested, that both parties should withdraw until their case was decided by those who were not personally interested in the matter. This was the only correct and proper course to be pursued, and he hoped his proposition would be agreed to by the House. He also referred to the case of Howell and Everett of Rhode Island, in the continental Congress, which had been cited by the CHAIRMAN, and showed that the Rhode Istad members did not vote on their own case in the first instance. Subsequently, however, they did vote upon such questions as were presented.

Mr. PROFFIT rose to appeal from the decision of the CHAIR. ["What decision?" from different parts of the House.]

Mr. W. C. JOHNSON rose and stated that he held in his hand a series of resolutions to offer, which would bring the House directly to a vote on the question at issue. [Cries of "order, order, order!"]

Mr. PETRIKIN rose to a point of order. He wished to know whether it was competent for the CHAIR to entertain three or four propositions at one time.

Mr. JOHNSON. Let the gentleman reduce his point of order to writing.

The CHAIR requested that the gentleman from Pennsylvania should reduce his point of order to writing.

Mr. W. C. JOHNSON would say what he had to say upon his resolution, while the gentleman was preparing his point of order. Mr. J. held that

the House had not the right to vote out the Representatives of an entire State. The House must conform to the Constitution and the laws, and they expressly inhibited the House from taking such a course, unless the members were sworn in. He contended that they could not adopt the proposition of the gentleman from North Carolina, because, by the law of apportioning Representatives, New Jersey was entitled to six Representatives, and it was not in the power of this House to deprive her of that representation.

Mr. PETRIKIN then presented his point of order in writing; but

The CHAIR decided against it, because the question to lay on the table could not be pending while the preliminary question was undecided.

Mr. PETRIKİN raised an additional point of order, as to whether any other motion could be made, which would set aside that motion. If such was the decision of the CHAIR, he would appeal from that decision.

The CHAIR said that whatever question might arise, the moment the House came to vote upon it, the question would arise as to who should vote upon it; and the question as to who should vote, must be settled before the question to lay on the table can be put.

Mr. RHETT thought the proper course would be to decide one question at a time. Mr. R. went over, and summed up the various questions pre] sented to the CHAIR, and concluded by moving the previous question on the appeal taken by Mr. PE

TRIKIN.

Mr. BRIGGS contended that as the question pending was on the motion of Mr. MCKAY, an appeal could not be taken on any other question.

The CHAIR then decided that Mr. PETRIKIN'S motion could not be entertained.

Mr. PETRIKIN. Then I appeal from that decision.

[Loud cries of "order!" "order!" "order ""] Mr. JOHNSON then asked for the reading of his resolution.

Mr. BYNUM objected to this course of piling motion upon motion. If we did not go on and decide questions according to some rule of order, would be utterly impossible to do any thing.

Mr. JOHNSON said he offered his resolution as a substitute for the motion of the gentleman from North Carolina. Mr. J's resolution was then read as follows:

Resolved, That a certificate of election as a member of the House of Representatives of the United States, duly made, in conformity with the laws of the State which the parties profess to represent, and signed by the proper officers under the great seal of the State, is sufficient per se to entitle the person to whom it is given to be sworn in as a member of the House, provided that no State shall have more Representatives than is allowed to it by the Constitution and laws of the United States.

Resolved, That, under the fifth section of the second article of the Constitution, the House of Representatives of the United States can only look beyond such certificate, and judge of the election, returns, and qualifications, of its own members, after it shall have been organized and sworn.

Mr. JOHNSON said he offered this proposition as an amendment to the motion of the gentleman from North Carolina, because he felt that he could not vote on the motion of that gentleman. We have not yet been sworn; we have not taken the oath of office prescribed by the Constitution of the United States, and he could not consent to see the House proceed to the solemn farce or mockery of voting the Representatives of a whole State out of this House, when the members of the House were not under the moral and religious obligations required by the Constitution.

The CHAIR said he did not feel authorized to entertain a resolution, the effect of which would be to deprive the State of New Jersey of her representation on this floor. It was not competent for this meeting to pass such a resolution. The resolution of the gentleman from North Carolina declared, in effect, that the people of the State of New Jersey should not be represented on this floor, and the CHAIR could not put the question, upon such a resolution, to the House.

Mr. JOHNSON. Then I will offer my resolution as a separate and distinct proposition. In reply to a proposition which had been made by some gentlemen on the floor, that all the members from New Jersey might vote, provided the result was not changed, he wished to say a few words. New Jersey was entitled to but six Representatives under the laws apportioning Representatives, and he held that it would be a monstrous innovation for the House to permit eleven members from that State to vote. That State was entitled to six Representatives, and she was entitled to no more: and the question here was, who those six Representatives should be? This question was settled by the Constitution of the United States and the laws of New Jersey, and it was incompetent for this House to take any question upon that until it was first organized, and gentlemen had taken the oath of office.

Mr. FRANCIS THOMAS rose to ask the gentleman from North Carolina [Mr. McKAY] to withdraw his proposition, in order that another effort might be made to settle this question. Mr. T. said he had moved no preliminary proposition, he had offered no amendments to propositions which had been before the House; not because he had not felt deeply interested in the questions-not because he did not feel a deep anxiety to see the House organized in an orderly manner, and at an early day, but because he believed that all the preliminary questions had a tendency to postpone the organization of the body. He believed that a large majority of the members of the House had made up their minds as to how they would vote on this question, in any shape which it might assume. Then let it be the effort of every gentleman to bring the House to action. What was the course best calculated to do so? Was it best for us to be chasing shadows and discussing questions which may never arise? We would have difficulties enough, by pursuing a straight forward course, without stepping aside to raise difficulties which were not in Our way. He knew that there were members here who held the opinion that four of these New Jersey members could vote upon the right of the fifth to take his seat. This was not his opinion; but he proposed to avoid, if possible, that and other such questions, because if we went on to discuss them, as we had done, we might be discussing here till doomsday without arriving at any practical result. The course, then, which he intended to pursue was, not to moot preliminary questions unnecessarily. Let the vote be taken. It was possible, when it was taken, that the case would stand as it stood to-day. It may be that the votes of the five dis puted members from New Jersey would not change the result, whether counted or not. When the vote was taken this morning, it appeared that four of the disputed New Jersey members had voted, but their votes could not change the result, therefore no objection had been made from any quarter to their voting. By this course, the House may avoid deciding on these vexed preliminary questions, and he thought every gentleman ought to endeavor to avoid them if possible; the public interest required this; but if they were to be decided on, let them be decided on when the necessity for it arises. It will be time enough, then, to decide on them.

With regard to the proposition of the gentleman from North Carolina, it, in his opinion, decided nothing. That proposition, as stated verbally, is, in effect, that the members from New Jersey shall not vote until the House decides that they shall vete. Well, suppose this proposition should be adopted by the House, it would be a mere abstraction. The House must then go a step further, and say whether they shall vote or not. It will be competent, then, for gentlemen to say that he (Mr. T.) should not vote until the House decided that he should vote. The same objection might be raised to any other gentleman's right to vote, and day after day would be spent in these preliminary ques tions, and no good would result from it. Then let us meet the question to-day, and come up to the question which is best calculated to avoid all difficulty. Let us take the vote to lay the resolution of the gentleman from Virginia on the table, or to reject it; and if the vote of the disputed members from

New Jersey does not change the result, let the decision of the House be pronounced without raising these preliminary questions of abstract right which serve but little practical purpose. This course had been suggested by the CHAIR Some days ago as the proper course to be pursued, and he hoped the House would take up this suggestion and act upon it now. In urging this course upon the House, he would state that his sole object was to bring the House to action and avoid those difficulties in which the House had been long involved, to the injury of the public service, and at the risk of its own dignity and capacity for future usefulness.

Mr. WISE would suggest a course by which the Ilouse might arrive at a speedy termination of this question. Let the gentleman from Maryland withdraw his proposition. Let the gentleman from North Carolina withdraw his resolation, and let the gentleman from South Carolina withdraw the motion to lay the resolution, submitted by him, [Mr. WISE] on the table. Then let the CLERK go on and call the roll, calling the members from New Jersey, who had presented the legal formal certificates, according to the Constitution and the laws of New Jersey. Then we will be prepared to vote; and when we come to vote upon any question, if the votes of the New Jersey members will not change the result, nothing need be said about their voting; but if it does, then the tellers can report the fact to the House, and the House can then act upon the question. He thought this would be the most satisfactory mode of getting over all difficulty in relation to this question, and hoped gentlemen would cease pursuing shadows, and unite upon some practical proposition of this kind.

Mr. McKAY, after a few remarks, which, in consequence of the noise and disorder prevailing, with repeated calls to order, were not heard, said that he had before expressed the opinion, which he repeated, that neither party should be permitted to vote. The question has been submitted to the CHAIR, but the CHAIR refused to put it, until it should be decided by the House who should vote as members from the State of New Jersey. The House had already decided that the five New Jersey gentlemen who held the certificates of the Governor should not vote, and the CHAIR refuses how to put any question to the House, for the reason that it must first decide who are to vote as members from New Jersey, while there is no proposition to decide that point, either in an affirmative or negative before the House. This he considered to be a monstrous assumption of authority by the CHAIR. The House has decided that five of the claimants shall not vote, and a member then submits a motion that the other five also shall be prevented from voting until the controversy is decided. The CHAIRMAN then declares that, while he occupies that chair, he never would permit a sovereign State to be disfranchised, by prohibiting her Representatives from voting on any question before that House; and therefore he declares that he would not put the question. Did not the CHAIRMAN himself, at the last session, submit a resolution to the House, that no member whose seat was contested should be entitled to vote upon any question before the House, until his right to a seat should be first investigated and decided upon? Now if it was constitutional for the CHAIRMAN himself to present that resolution as a member of the House of Representatives, was it not constitutional for him, as a member of the House of Representatives, to offer a similar proposition? If, however, the House was willing to proceed at once to a vote, he would be willing to withdraw his proposition.

Mr. CRAIG asked if the House was now about to decide the right to seats of the members from New Jersey? He asked, in the language of the eloquent gentleman from Georgia, who addressed them the other day, how was the House to enforce its edicts? Under the difficulty they were involved in the other day, the CLERK deciding that he could not put a question, a Chairman was appointed, who would have the power to put questions. Now, what did the CHAIR tell this House just now? "As long as I occupy this chair, I will not suffer a Sovereign State to be disfranchised by excluding

the votes of her members on any question before the House." Sir, said Mr. C. we can never get along unless we attack difficulties one at a time. The first difficulty was that produced by the CHAIR itself in declaring that he would not put a question; his refusal to register the edicts of the House. The House had determined that the members who presented the certificates of the Governor of New Jersey shall not be permitted to vote. Let us, then, (said Mr. C.) dismiss all quibbles; let us feel and act as men, and consider this tantamount to a decision that neither party shall vote until the controversy is settled. [So much noise and confusion prevailed while Mr. CRAIG was speaking, that the Reporter heard him very imperfectly; and, in the concluding part of his remarks, his voice was completely drowned by the cries of "order, order!" "go on, go on!" &c.]

Mr. RHETT, in reply to some words from Mr. WISE, not heard, declined to withdraw his motion to lay that gentleman's resolution on the table. The question, he said, to decide the fate of that resolution, could as well be taken on the motion to lay it on the table as in any other way.

Mr. JOHNSON of Maryland then said he refused to withdraw his motion; whereupon,

Mr. WISE moved the previous question on it. Mr. RHETT then asked if that resolution of Mr. JOHNSON was before the House.

The CHAIR answered, that no question could be before the House, until it should decide who should vote as members from the State of New Jersey.

Mr. RHETT stated the question as he understood it. It first arose on his (Mr. R's) motion to lay the resolution of the gentleman from Virginia [Mr. WISE] on the table; next on the resolution of the gentleman from Maryland, as a substitute; and then came the decision of the CHAIR, that no question could be put until the Honse decides who shall vote as members from New Jersey. Now he moved to lay the question raised by the CHAIR on the table.

Mr. WISE informed the gentleman from South Carolina [Mr. RHETT] that no motion could be put on that question until the preliminary one of who was entitled to vote should be first decided.

Mr. SLADE desired to know the question that was before the House.

The CHAIR said that the main question was for the meeting to determine who was entitled to vote from the State of New Jersey. The House having determined, by reversing the decision of the CHAIR, that the members, holding the certificates of the Governor of New Jersey, should not vote, it was now necessary that the meeting should say who was entitled to vote, inasmuch as they would not deprive a sovereign State of its representation on this floor.

Mr. SLADE understood the gentleman from Maryland [Mr. JOHNSON] had offered a proposition here, which he was disposed to keep before the House, unless the gentleman from South Carolina would withdraw his motion to lay the resolution of the gentleman from Virginia [Mr. WISE] on the table.

Mr. JOHNSON of Maryland said he would modify his resolution by withdrawing the second clause of it. The first clause contained a distinct proposition, and the House, by taking the question on it, would come to a direct vote on the principle involved.

Mr. SLADE then rose and made some remarks, which will be reported in full hereafter.

Mr. GRAHAM of North Carolina rose to a question of order, several members trying to obtain the floor, and speaking at the same time.

The CHAIR again stated the question. The House must first decide who shall vote as members of New Jersey, and then the question on the motion of the gentleman from South Carolina could be put. The CHAIR would, however, suggest a substitute for his decision, which he would adopt, if it met with the concurrence of the House. This was, the course of procedure he suggested on Saturday last, and which had been already adopted on taking two or three questions; that is, the CHAIR would put the question, and the tellers would, on counting the votes, report the result to the House;

and whether any of the members whose seats were contested voted on the same, and should it be found any such voting would change the result, it would be for the House to determine whether such votes should be counted.

Mr. BLACK asked the CLERK to read the reso. lution, and it was read as follows:

Resolved, That the acting CLERK be directed to call the members of the House, including, in such call, the members from New Jersey, who have the certificates of the Governor of that State that they are elected as Representatives of the Twenty-sixth Congress.

Mr. SLADE rose and contended for his right to go on with his remarks.

The CHAIR said that the question was, who should vote from the State of New Jersey.

Mr. WISE. The question is on the motion of the gentleman from South Carolina to lay my proposition on the table; and therefore, the gentleman from Vermont was speaking out of order. We are come now, said Mr. W. to the direct question, and he beged gentlemen to let it be taken.

The CHAIR did not consider the gentleman from Vermost to be out of order. The reasons assigned by the CHAIR, for his decision, were not heard by the Reporter.

Mr. SLADE said, as so many gentlemen were anxious for him to yield the floor, he would do so to accommodate them.

Mr. RIVES rose, and attempted to address the CHAIR, to make some suggestions as to the mode of proceeding, when

Mr. WISE, and several other gentlemen, called him to order. Great noise and confusion prevailed at the time, and repeated cries of go on, go on, were also heard.

Mr. RIVES again attempted to obtain the floor, when

Mr. WISE again interrupted him with calls to order. Whether the question was on the motion submitted by the gentleman from South Carolina to lay his resolution, or the resolution of the gentleman from Maryland, on the table, still the motion was not debatable, and he hoped the CHAIR would order the gentleman to take his seat.

The CHAIR was unwilling to arrest any gentleman on a point of order, who thought he had any new proposition to present to the meeting.

Mr. RIVES said it was not his intention to throw any obstacles in the way. He desired to come to some conclusion, and therefore he proposed to gentlemen to permit the gentleman from South Carolina [Mr. RHETT] to offer his resolution as an amendment to the resolution of his colleague, [Mr. WISE,] and let the House come to a decisive

vote.

Mr. BRIGGS made a few remarks, showing the necessity of enforcing the point of order, and preserving decorum in the House.

Mr. PROFFIT endeavored to obtain the floor, and at the same time giving his opinion that the motion was debatable, and he wanted to have his share of it.

Mr. P. was called to order by several gentlemen, and he took his seat.

The CHAIR then put the question on Mr. RHETT'S motion and directed the tellers to report the the names of those members voting whose seats were contested; and also to report how the vote would be without the votes of those gentlemen whose seats were contested, and how it would be with the votes of those gentlemen.

Mr. HOLLEMAN denied that such was the question before the House. He also denied that the question was ever presented for the House to decide, as stated by the CHAIR, as to who should vote as menbers from New Jersey, though the CHAIR wished to make it so. To constitute a question before the House there must be an affirmative and a negative, or how could the House decide it. How could it decide the question as to who should vote as members from New Jersey, when, having already decided that one set of the claimants should not vote, the CHAIR refuses to put the question as to the right of the others to vote! He denied that the CHAIR had a right to make any such decision. This was putting the House in a position in which it could

neither advance nor recede. Some days ago, when the House was in a similar condition, in consequence of the CLERK deeming himself incompetent to put questions to the House, the gentleman Occupying the Chair forcibly appealed to his fellow-members present to relieve themselves from the embarrassment in which the decision of the CLERK had placed them, by removing the CLERK and putting some one in his place. This appeal had been followed up by the motion of the gentleman from South Carolina, which placed the gentleman himself in the Chair. It was then supposed that the House was relieved from the difficulties in which the decision of the CLERK placed them. But really, from the decision of the CHAIR just made, it appeared to him that it would become necessary for the House to remove him from the CHAIR, and put some one in his place who was willing to put a question. Mr. H. after a few remarks, made during much noise and confusion, appealed from the decision of the CHAIR, and asked for the previous question on the appeal.

Mr. BRIGGS said if the gentleman from Virginia would withdraw his objections, he would submit the proposition of the CHAIR to the House for its decision in the form of a motion. Mr. B. then submitted the following, which he read:

Resolved, That on the motion of Mr. RHETT to lay Mr. WISE's motion on the table, or on Mr. WISE'S resolution itself, the tellers shall count all the persons who may pass between them; and if any pass whose right to vote is disputed, the tellers shall report their names to the CHAIR, after the number of votes on both sides are reported, for the decision of the House.

Mr. HOLLEMAN declined withdrawing his proposition, and insisted on taking an appeal from the decision of the CHAIR.

The CHAIR asked what decision the gentleman from Virginia demanded an appeal from.

Mr. HOLLEMAN sad that his appeal was from the decision of the CHAIR, that no question could be put until the House decided who should vote as members from New Jersey.

The CHAIR said, I withdraw that decision. [Much laughter.]

The question was then taken on Mr. BRIGGS'S motion, and it was carried without a division.

The CHAIR then stated the question on Mr. RHETT'S motion, and instructed the tellers, in counting, to report if any members, whose seats are contested, voted; using the language of the resolution just adopted on the motion of Mr. BRIGGS.

The House having seconded the call for the previous question,

The question was then taken, Shall the main question be now pu? and was decided in the aflirmative without a division.

The main question to lay Mr. WISE's resolution on the table was then put, Messrs. DROMGOOLE and DAVIES having been appointed tellers.

On counting the result, the tellers reported that there were 115 votes in the affirmative, and 114 in the negative; Mr. NAYLOR from Pennsylvania, whose seat was contested, voting with the nays.

The CHAIR announced this decision of the Hause to be 115 in the affirmative and 115 in the negative, (the CHAIR voting with the nays,) so that there being a tie, the motion was lost.

Mr. SMITH of Maine denied that the motion was lost, and appealed from the decision of the CHAIR. He understood the tellers as having reported that Mr. NAYLOR, whose seat was contested, voted with the nays. He denied the right of Mr. NAYLOR to vote, and objected to its being counted.

Mr. NAYLOR observed that the gentleman from Maine [Mr. SMITH] had challenged his right to vote. Now, he challenged the right of the gentleman himself to vote. Here are my credentials, said Mr. N. holding them in his hand.

Mr. SMITH of Maine. I turn the gentleman over to Mr. INGERSOLL, who has the certificate of the judges of election, and the certificate of the Governor, under the broad seal of the State of Pennsylvania.

Mr. WISE moved that the vote of the gentle

man from Pennsylvania be counted, and on that motion, he called for the previous question.

Mr. REYNOLDS, amidst much noise and disorder, moved an adjournment-a number of gentlemen on the floor.

Mr. WISE and others opposed the adjournment, Mr. WISE proposing to sit by candle light.

The CHAIR was proceeding to put the question on Mr. WISE's resolution, which he said was the next in order; when

Mr. REYNOLDS insisted on his motion for adjournment, and demanded that the question be taken on it.

The CHAIR said that the motion to adjourn was not in order, while a question was pending.

Mr. SMITH and several members here contended that the question of Mr. RusTr's motion was not decided, and that it yet depended on the decision of Mr. NAYLOR's right to vole.

Mr. WELLER again moved the adjournmen'. Mr. WISE restated his motion that Mr. NAYLOR'S Vote be counted, and also his motion for the previous question on it.

Mr. BRIGGS briefly explained the state of the question before the House. The question, he said, was put by the CHAIR, on the motion of the gentleman from South Carolina, [Mr. RHETT,] to lay the resolution of the gentleman from Virginia [Mr. WISE on the table, and the tellers reported that the vote in the affirmative was 115, and in the negative, 114; but in conformity with the resolution adopted on his mution, they also reported that Mr. NAYLOR, one of the gentlemen whose seat was contested, voted with the nays. The CHAIR Voting in the negative, there would have been a tie, and the resolution consequently lost, had there not been a vote cast by a gentleman whose seat was contested; but as there was such a vote given, the House must decide whether that vote should be counted, before the question could be considered as finally settled, whether the resolution of the gentleman from Virginia should be laid on the table or not. This, he believed, was a correct state of the case.

The CHAIR said he understood the decision of the House, in the motion of the gentleman from Massachusetts, [Mr. BRIGGS,] to refer only to the contested seats from New Jersey, and that the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. NAYLOR] did not come within the decision of the House. The question, therefore, the CHAIR considered to be on the resolution of the gentleman from Virginia.

Mr. BRIGGS said that his motion was general in its application, and applied to all the gentlemen whose seats were contested. At Mr. B's request the resolution was read by the CLERK, amidst much noise and confusion.

The CHAIR said that he had announced the decision of the House, that the resolution was lost, and did not hear the report of the tellers that a member whose seat was contested had voted.

Mr. DROMGOOLE rose and stated that, as one of the tellers, he distinctly stated to the CHAIR, when he announced the vote, that Mr. NA LOR, one of the gentlemen whose seat was contested, had voted. In this statement, Mr. D. was sus tained by Mr. DAVIES, the other teller, by Mr. SMITH of Maine, an 1 several other gentlemen.

The CHAIR said that the question before the House was the previous question on the resolution of the gentleman from Virginia.

Mr. TURNEY appealed from the decision of the CHAIR, as he considered that the first question to be decid d was, whether Mr. NAYLOR's vote should be counted.

NEY

Mr. WELLER moved an adjournment, and the question was taken; Messrs. GRAVES and TURwere appointed tellers, and on counting the votes, they reported that there werefor the adjournment 116, against it 113; Messrs. KILLE, COOFER, and RYALL, members from New Jersey, whose seals are contested, voting in the affirmative, and Mesars. HALSTED, AYCRIGG, and YORKE, similarly situated, voting in the negative.

The CHAIR then stated that the votes of the members whose seats were disputed not varying the result, it was decided in the affirmative, and

that

The House adjourned.

IN SENATE,

WEDNESDAY, December 11, 1839.

Mr. NICHOLAS and Mr. MOUTON appeared in their seats this morning.

Mr. BENTON offered the following resolution, which lays over:

Resolved, That the President of the United States be requested to cause to be communicated to the Senate all the information which the War Office contains, or can conveniently procure, of the mas. sacres of individuals, of families, of small parties, and of shipwrecked crews or passengers, which have taken place in Florida during the present hos tilities, and including those which took place before the war became open on the part of the Indians; noting, as far as it can be conveniently done, how far families have been broken up, and driven from their homes, their houses burnt, and their fields and property destroyed.

Mr. BENTON also offered the following resolution, which lays over:

Resolved, That the Secretary of the Treasury be directed to report to the Senate as follows:

1. A table of the import and export of gold bullion, with the excess of each, annually, from the commencement of the Federal Government, or as far back as the returns in the Treasury Department will enable the table to be made up. 2. A like table of gold coin. 3. A like table of silver bullion. 4. A like table of silver coin.

5. A table of recapitulation showing the total annual imports and exports of coin and bullion in one column, and the excesses in two other columns, for the same length of time.

6. A detailed statement of the weekly exporta. tions of coin and bullion for the year 1839, showing the names and residences of the exporters, and their consignees in foreign countries.

7. A detailed table of exports and imports of coin and bullion of the United States for the year 1839.

8. A table of the annual coinage of gold and sil. ver at the Mint of the United States and the Branch Mints, from the time they were respectively esta blished.

9. A table of the annual product of the gold mines of the United States from the time of their discovery.

The whole of said tables made up to the end of the year 1833.

A message was received from the President of the United States; which was laid on the table. The Senate then went into Executive session; and afterwards Adjourned.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
WEDNESDAY, December 11, 1839.

As soon as the journal of yesterday was read, Mr. WISE rose and moved an amendment to the journal, to insert after the paragraph which declared that Mr. SMITH of Maine contested Mr. NAYLOR'S right to vote, "and Mr. NAYLOR also contested Mr. SMITH's right to vote."

Mr. SMITH said he had no objection to this amendment in the journal.

The question was then put, and the amendment of the journal agreed to.

The CHAIR then stated the question to be on the appeal of the gentleman from Tennessee [Mr. TURNEY] from the decision of the CHAIR. The CHAIR had decided that the motion of the gentleman from South Carolina, [Mr. RHETT,] to lay Mr. Wise's resolution on the table, was lost-the vete standing 115 in the affirmative and 115 in the negative, counting the votes of the CHAIR and Mr. NAYLOR in the negative From this decision the gentleman from Tennessee had taken an appeal to the House.

Mr. WISE then called the previous question on this appeal, which was seconded, and the main question was ordered to be put.

The main question then, was, whether the decision of the CHAIR, as stated above, should stand as the judgment of the House.

Messrs. JOHNSON and CARTER, both of Tennessee, were appointed tellers; and when the yeas were counted, the tellers announced that there