236 



CONNECTICUT. 



referred to as rejected, were rejected solely because 

 the word "for "'was printed thereon as part of the 

 title of each office voted for, and that therefore the 

 said ballots were illegally rejected. 



The committee found a total of 808 ballots 

 rejected for illegal reasons, and 20 ballots il- 

 legally counted in Norwich for the Democratic 

 candidates. Assuming all these rejected ballots 

 to be Republican, it found that the only candi- 

 date having a majority of all the votes cast was 

 the Democratic candidate for Comptroller. 



The report of the Democratic minority of the 

 committee declared all the Democratic candidates 

 to be duly elected. 



Prolonged debates upon these reports con- 

 sumed the time of the House for nearly a week. 

 On Feb. 3, by a strict party vote, the resolutions 

 recommended by the majority of the committee 

 were passed. These resolutions declared the facts 

 found by the majority of the committee to be true, 

 and postponed any further action by the House 

 till the Senate should join with it in an examina- 

 tion of the returns. The Senate replied by a resolu- 

 tion declaring that on the first day of the session 

 it had made all the examination of the returns 

 it could lawfully make and had declared the re- 

 sult, and that it could lawfully take no further 

 action in the premises. The House then passed 

 a resolution proposing a conference committee of 

 five members from each House, which should 

 take into consideration the report of the House 

 investigating committee. The Senate refused to 

 accede to this, but proposed a like committee to 

 take into consideration the separate action of 

 the two Houses regarding the late election. This 

 resolution, after considerable debate and some 

 misunderstanding between the two Houses re- 

 garding the use of the word " late " therein, was 

 finally adopted by the House. The committee 

 was appointed on Feb. 10, and on Feb. 12 it re- 

 ported that no basis of agreement respecting the 

 controversy could be reached. The House then 

 passed a resolution declaring Nicholas Staub to 

 be elected Comptroller, by virtue of which, on 

 Feb. 16, the office was peaceably surrendered to 

 him by Comptroller Wright. By another reso- 

 lution at the same time the House expressed 

 its willingness to unite with the Senate in the 

 passage of a joint resolution requesting the ad- 

 vice of the judges of the Supreme Court on all 

 questions of law involved in their differences, 

 and pledged itself to abide by their decision. 

 The Senate refused to accept this offer, insisting 

 that there was nothing to be arbitrated or de- 

 cided. It claimed that Luzon B. Morris and his 

 Democratic associates on the State ticket were 

 the only legal State officials, and it further re- 

 fused to transact any business of legislation 

 whatever till the House should declare them 

 elected. It also refused to recognize in any man- 

 ner Gov. Bulkeley and the other hold-over Re- 

 publican officials. Gov. Bulkeley, on Feb,tl7, 

 sent several communications to the Senate, ambng 

 them the renomination of Judge Loomis of the 

 Supreme Court, but it refused to receive any 

 such communications, and numerous messages 

 sent by him subsequently were likewise refused. 

 In the House several bills were passed, among 

 them the regular appropriation bills, but the 

 Senate rigidly adhered to its purpose of obstruc- 

 tion, and although several other propositions 



were offered by the House no prospect of a set- 

 tlement appeared for several weeks. About 

 March 17 the House passed a bill, known as the 

 Judson bill, which provided that any person 

 voted for at the recent election may bring a pe- 

 tition to a judge of the Superior Court within 

 fifteen days after the passage of the act, and 

 that the decision of this judge shall be subject 

 to appeal to the Supreme Court of Errors. The 

 bill empowers the court to open the ballot-boxes. 

 If the General Assembly is not in session when 

 final judgment is rendered, the person adminis- 

 tering the office of Governor is directed to con- 

 vene the Assembly, which shall correct the elec- 

 tion returns in accordance with the finding of 

 the court. 



When this bill reached the Senate, several 

 counter-propositions in the 'form of bills for 

 effecting a settlement were introduced and dis- 

 cussed in that body. Finally, on March 26, all 

 these were referred to a Senate committee of two 

 Republicans and two Democrats, in order that 

 it might agree upon a measure that both parties 

 would support. This committee, on April 1, re- 

 ported no agreement possible. The Senators 

 then withdrew their several propositions, and 

 the Senate refused to pass the Judson bill. It 

 further resolved 



That this body will not further consider any offer 

 looking toward* a compromise or settlement, so long 

 as the House maintains its present attitude toward 

 the Constitution, and will not receive or entertain any 

 bill or resolution relating to the State officers, emanat- 

 ing from the House, until the House has performed 

 its constitutional duty. 



This action was no sooner taken than the 

 House passed a resolution adjourning till Nov. 11. 

 The Senate then adjourned from week to week, 

 holding only a brief session on each Tuesday, 

 till April 27, when it adjourned to May 14. On 

 that day, after a short session, it adjourned to 

 June 15, from that day to June 29, and from 

 June 29 to Sept. 7, without taking any action 

 on the bills pending before it. As the appro- 

 priations made by the preceding General Assem- 

 bly covered only the two years ending July 1, 

 1891, the failure' of the Senate to act on the ap- 

 propriation bills passed by the House caused con- 

 siderable embarrassment to the State and to the 

 public institutions. 



When the House adjourned from April 1 to 

 Nov. 11 without having declared the election of 

 any State officers except the Comptroller, the 

 Democrats decided to bring their case into the 

 courts, and on April 14 two writs of quo war- 

 ranto were filed in the Superior Court at New 

 Haven, one brought by Luzon B. Morris against 

 acting-Gov. Bulkeley, and the other by Joseph 

 W. Alsop against acting-Lieut.-Gov. Merwin. 

 These cases involved a decision of the legality of 

 the action of Gov. Bulkeley and Lieut.-Gov. 

 Merwin in retaining possession of their respect- 

 ive offices. On May 8 the defendants filed their 

 answers, and early in June replications were 

 filed by the plaintiffs. Later, in June, Joseph 

 W. Alsop died, and his case was therefore dis- 

 continued. No hearing had been held in the 

 other case when the Senate reassembled on 

 Sept. 7. It, therefore, again adjourned to Nov. 

 10, after listening to eulogies of Dr. Alsop. On 

 Oct. 16, before Judge Thayer of the Superior 



