| PREVIOUS | NEXT | NEW SEARCH |
A Century of Lawmaking for a New Nation: U.S. Congressional Documents and Debates, 1774-1875
Journals of the Continental Congress --WEDNESDAY, MAY 19, 1784.
Congress assembled: Present, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pensylvania, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina and South Carolina.
A motion was made by Mr. [John Francis] Mercer, seconded by Mr. [Richard Dobbs] Spaight, in the words following:
The votes of Mr. [William] Ellery and Mr. [David] Howell, on behalf of the state of Rhode Island, were objected to
Page 412 | Page image
when the preceding question was put, as not being members of Congress, and that for the following reasons: The right of those gentlemen to represent the State of Rhode Island was stated in a report of the committee of Qualifications, entered on the journals on the 13th day of the present month, in the words following, viz. (here the report to be inserted) from which it appears that Mr. [William] Ellery and Mr. [David] Howell, claimed a right to sit and act as members of Congress, from an act of the legislature of that State, passed on the 22 of August, 1777, which act contains the following words, "that the delegates appointed, or who may be appointed, to represent this State in Congress be, and they, or either of them, are hereby empowered to represent said State in Congress, until they, or either of them, shall have due notice of their re-election, or until the delegates who may be appointed in their room shall take their seats in Congress, the act directing the election of the said delegates for one year, to the contrary notwithstanding:" and the said Mr. [William] Ellery and Mr. [David] Howell, affirming that the said act gave them a right under the Confederation to represent the State of Rhode Island, after a year from the time of their election as aforesaid had expired, so that they did not exceed the term of a year after first taking their seats in Congress. And the right of Mr. [William] Ellery and Mr. [David] Howell, to sit and act in Congress, depending on a construction of the said act of Rhode Island, and the Confederation and the fact that the year from the time of their appointment as aforesaid had expired on theday of May instant being agreed and admitted. And the question upon the report of the committee of qualifications under those circumstances being taken in Congress, four states voted against the construction affirmed by Mr. [William] Ellery and Mr. [David] Howell, two in favour of such construction,
Page 413 | Page image
and three were divided; and when the preceding question was taken, there appearing but seven states in the affirmative, including the State of Rhode Island, and the question from its nature involving the right of Mr. [William] Ellery and Mr. [David] Howell, to sit and act as members of Congress, who were the only persons answering for that State, the decision of Congress is required,
Whether the State of Rhode Island shall be entered on the journal as voting on the preceding question?1
[Note 1: 1 This motion, in the writing of John Francis Mercer, is in the Papers of the Continental Congress, No. 36, II, folio 387.]
A motion was made by Mr. [James] Monroe, seconded by Mr. [Arthur] Lee, to commit the foregoing motion; and on the question to commit, the yeas and nays being required by Mr. [Jonathan] Blanchard,
{table}
So the question was lost.
Page 414 | Page image
After debate, the foregoing motion was withdrawn, and the following motion was made by Mr. [John Francis] Mercer, seconded by Mr. [Thomas] Stone,
The votes of Mr. [William] Ellery and Mr. [David] Howell, in behalf of the state of Rhode Island, on the question entered on the Journal in the following words: "Is Mr. [David] Howell in order to speak as a Member of Congress" having been objected to as not being members of Congress, and it being alleged that the question in its nature involved the question of the right of those gentlemen to act as members of Congress, and they being the only persons appearing to vote for the said State, the decision of Congress is required, whether Rhode Island shall be entered on the Journal as voting on that question.1
[Note 1: 1 This motion, in the writing of John Francis Mercer, is in the Papers of the Continental Congress, No. 36, II, folio 393.]
A motion was made by Mr. [Jeremiah Townley] Chase, seconded by Mr. [Arthur] Lee, to postpone that motion, in order to take up the following:
The votes of Mr. [William] Ellery and Mr. [David] Howell, on behalf of the State of Rhode Island, being objected to when the preceding question was put,
Have Mr. [William] Ellery and Mr. [David] Howell a right to speak and vote as Members of Congress, after the following question, to wit: "That the year for which the said delegates of the State of Rhode Island were appointed is expired," had been taken on the report of the committee of qualifications, and lost as appears by the yeas and nays, to wit: (Here insert the yeas and nays.)
And on the question to postpone for the purpose abovementioned, the yeas and nays being required by Mr. [Jeremiah Townley] Chase,
Page 415 | Page image
{table}
So the question was lost.
A motion was then made by Mr. [Roger] Sherman, seconded by Mr. [John] Beatty, to strike out the following words, "it being alleged that the question in its nature involved the question of the right of those gentlemen to act as Members of Congress, and"
And on the question, shall those words stand the yeas and nays being required by Mr. [Thomas] Stone,
{table}
Page 416 | Page image
So the question was lost, and the words were struck out.
The motion being amended to read,
The votes of Mr. [William] Ellery and Mr. [David] Howell, on behalf of the State of Rhode Island, on the question entered on the journal in the following words: "Is Mr. [David] Howell in order to speak as a member of Congress" having been objected to as not being members of Congress, and they being the only persons appearing to vote for the said State,
The decision of Congress is required, whether Rhode Island shall be entered on the Journal as voting on that question.
And on the question, the yeas and nays being required by Mr. [Jonathan] Blanchard,
{table}
Page 417 | Page image
So the question was lost.
PREVIOUS SECTION .. NEXT SECTION .. NAVIGATOR
| PREVIOUS | NEXT | NEW SEARCH |