Bath
This text of 1 Rep. Cont. El. 73 (Bath) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts House of Representatives primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The election of Samuel Davis, William Webb, and Jonathan Hyde, the members returned from the town of Bath, and who were elected by a general ticket, at one balloting, was controverted by Joshua Wingate, Jr., and others, on the ground, that the town of Bath, on the first day of May, 1809, contained no more than five hundred and sixty-four ratable polls, and therefore, was constitutionally entitled to elect but two representatives for that year.1
The committee on elections, to whom the memorial of the said Wingate and others was referred, at the June session, reported a reference of the subject, to the next session;
The reference was agreed to by the house, and in pursuance of the order of the committee, the list and copy required were furnished by the members, and the objectionable names given by the petitioners.
At the January session, depositions were produced before [74]*74the committee, to prove who, on the disputed list, were or were not ratable polls, and the committee, upon a consideration thereof, reported, that the town of Bath contained a sufficient number of ratable polls to entitle it to send three representatives. The report was agreed to.1
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
1 Rep. Cont. El. 73, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bath-masshserep-1810.