Richmond Enquirer

VIRGINIA LEGISLATURE.

PROCEEDINGS OF THE HOUSE OF DELEGATES.

Monday, Feb. 11. A communication from the Senate, that they had passed the bill "concerning notaries public in this commonwealth," with an amendment.—On Mr. Loyall's motion it was laid upon the table.

The following resolution from the Committee for Courts of Justice was taken up:

"Resolved, as the opinion of this committee, That the petition of the said Augustine Leftwich, jr. stating that on the 25th day of January last, he intermarried with a certain Halda Hackworth, the sister of his former wife, (not knowing at that time that such marriage was inhibited by the laws of this state; and praying that the said marriage may be declared legal and valid, and that a presentment which has been made against him, in consequence thereof, in the superior court of law for the county of Bedford, may be dismissed. be rejected."

An unavailing motion was made by Mr. Mennis, to amend this resolution by striking out the words "be rejected," and inserting "is reasonable." The resolution was agreed to.

A considerable part of to-day's session was occupied in making three military appointments (as stated in our last.)

Tuesday, Feb. 12.—A communication from the Senate, that they had passed the bills: "concerning Elk and Guyandotte rivers;"—"authorising separate elections in the counties of Monongalia and Tazewell;" —and also that they had passed with amendments the bills—"providing for the sale of the lands of which Thomazin Ellzey died seized and possessed;" and "concerning Archibald Batte."—The amendments to the first named bill were agreed to by the House; and those proposed to the last bill were laid upon the table.

Various bills were reported by the Committees.

Engrossed bills:—"for paying the officers of the General Assembly"—"Incorporating a Literary and Library Company in the town of Lynchburg"—"Releasing to Ann Purcell widow of Charles Purcell, the Commonwealth's right to certain real estate whereof the said Charles Purcell died seized"—"fixing the allowance to guards and jailors for the security and maintenance of criminals;"—"changing the times for holding the superior courts of Law for the county of Franklin;"—were severally read a 3d time and passed.

Various other bills had their 1st or 2d readings.

On motion of Mr. Mallory of Brunswick the hour of meeting was changed to 10 o'clock.

Wednesday, Feb. 13.—The engrossed bill "to amend an act reducing into one act the several acts concerning the election of members of the General Assembly, and for other purposes," was taken up.

Mr. SHERRARD called on the patrons of the bill for the reasons which should induce the house to pass it. He objected to the power which it conferred on deputy sheriffs, whom he considered not generally entitled to the exercise of such authority.

Mr. RIVES, of Prince George, said his object in moving the resolution, out of which the bill had grown, was to prevent contested elections. The house had, this winter, a number of cases of this kind; and had actually reversed the returns made of the election of three members. He wished to save the time and expense of the legislature in this respect, by prescribing a rule of conduct for the sheriffs which shall be understood and acted upon alike in every county. The diversity of the practice among sheriffs, in challenging illegal votes, he thought, ought to be remedied. By this means, persons were permitted, in many instances, to exercise the right of suffrage, to whom a valuable provision in the constitution, had denied that right.

Mr. BLACKBURN had no doubt as to the construction of the election law. He had always thought the sheriffs were satisfied of the legality of the votes, before they signed the return, which was a solemn official act, stating that the electors were "qualified according to law." But he had understood it was the practice of some sheriffs to permit men to vote who had no right, when their votes were not challenged by the candidates. The bill, he said, did not confer additional powers on deputy sheriffs, but only contains sanctions to existing laws. He referred to the contested elections of the present session to show the necessity of some legislative exposition of the subject.

Mr. MASON advocated the passage of the bill. The power given to sheriffs to administer oaths was not more than what was given to the candidates—and was not in his opinion exceptionable. There were other important provisions in the bill. It was made the duty of the high sheriffs to attend the elections. Heretofore, they were conducted by deputies, who were generally young men, not of that stability and respectability of character, possessed by the high sheriffs, whose standing in life and long services as magistrates, qualified them for it. The other provision explained more clearly than the existing law, the causes for which the polls shall be kept open.—He referred to a case in which, during the last spring, the voters of a certain county could not attend the election in consequence of a snow storm. The law providing for rain, rise of water, &c. but omitting to mention snow, the sheriff decided he had no power to adjourn the election. This circumstance he said was provided for in the bill, which he hoped would pass.

Mr. HUNTON expressed his disapprobation of the bill. If it passed, he said, the election in the county of Fauquier would not be gone through in several days. The candidates know more voters than the sheriffs, and were the most proper persons to challenge the votes. The high sheriff in Fauquier always attended the elections. and, if the bill should pass, and he was disposed to act fraudulently, he could elect any one he pleased. He objected to taking from the candidates, the power they now possessed of challenging votes, and administering oaths.

Mr. MASON explained that the bill did not take from the candidates any right which they now had.

Mr. EPPES thought: there was some misunderstanding on the subject. The bill, he said, only required that to be done under a penalty, which is now done without a penalty. He spoke of the difference of opinion among sheriffs as to their right of challenge, and explained the course adopted under the present law, of tendering an oath in doubtful cases, and if refused, of putting the vote on the back of the poll. &c. The bill he contended did not give more power to sheriffs, who are now authorised to tender an oath.

Mr. HUNTON did not consider the sheriff had power to swear an applicant to vote. until the vote had been challenged by one of the candidates. He repeated that in Fauquier the sheriff did not know more than one third of the voters, and consequently could not decide upon their qualifications as well as the candidates.

Mr. BLACKBURN did not come here to legislate for the county of Fauquier, but for the whole state, and he considered it his duty to consult the interest of the people at large.

Mr. HUNTON only mentioned Fauquier to show the operation of the law upon all the large counties. He moved that the bill be postponed to the 1st March.

Mr. MENNIS concurred in the explanation of the law given by the member from Fauquier. He said the sheriff in conducting an election acted purely as an executive officer, and to make him a judge of the qualifications of voters, would put it in his power to harass the friends of any particular candidate, if disposed to do so. He contended that the sheriff should have no other power but that of administering an oath. This power was sufficient to protect the purity of elections—more power, instead of having that effect, might endanger it; and there would, in future, exist, in the partiality of sheriffs, constant ground for contested elections.

Mr. HOLLIMAN supposed the gentleman last up, had forgotten that part of the law which imposed such a heavy penalty on sheriffs for partiality.

Mr. GARLAND asked that the Speaker would report the enacting clause in the bill. The Speaker reported that it would go into operation from the passing thereof.

Mr. GARLAND thought this a sufficient reason for the postponement of the bill. He said it was to operate on the next elections, and from the nature of things, could not reach many of the counties in time. It imposed penalties for the non-performance of duties, which it would be impossible should be understood in time to be performed. He thought the election law was generally understood—and had heard no complaint which ought to induce the passage of a new law on the subject.

The bill was then indefinitely postponed, without a count.

On motion of Mr. HARVIE, the following resolution was adopted:

Resolved, That the Executive be requested to inform this House, what steps, if any, have been taken to carry into effect, a resolution which was passed at the last session of the legislature, which had for its object, the procuring of further subscriptions, for the erection of a monument to the memory of the late General George Washington.

Discussions spreading on the subject of the Kentucky mission were postponed until to-day.

The other proceedings of the House will be noticed in our next.