Massachusetts 1806 House of Representatives, Salem
- House of Representatives (State)
- State Representative
- Massachusetts 1806 House of Representatives, Salem
- First Ballot
- House of Representatives/State Representative
- William Cleveland, Henry Elkins, John Hathorne, John Southwick, William Stearns, Joseph Story, Joshua Ward, Joseph White, Jr., Joseph Winn, Edward Allen, Ebenezer Beckford, Samuel G. Derby, William Gray, Jr., Samuel Putnam, Samuel Ropes, scattering
|Candidates:||William Cleveland||Henry Elkins||John Hathorne||John Southwick||William Stearns||Joseph Story||Joshua Ward||Joseph White, Jr.||Joseph Winn||Edward Allen||Ebenezer Beckford||Samuel G. Derby||William Gray, Jr.||Samuel Putnam||Samuel Ropes||scattering|
|Final Result: ||550||550||550||550||550||550||550||550||550||10||10||10||10||10||10||6|
|Town of Salem||550||550||550||550||550||550||550||550||550||10||10||10||10||10||10||6|
"The election of Representatives for this town, was held at the Court House on Thursday last. The meeting opened at 9 o'clock in the forenoon, and was fully attended by both political parties. It became necessary to fix the number of representative the town would see this year. The Republicans proposed nine and the Federalist 6. The chairman of the Selectman, Col Hathorne, declared the vote to be in favor of 9 - it was doubted by the Federalist, and the question put and again carried by a large majority and declared by the Chairman and agreed to by the whole board of Selectmen, .... It was proposed by the Federalist to adjourn to Court Street or some other street, for several streets were named, and to arrange the two parties on opposite sides, in different divisions. This was objected to by the Republicans - It was stated to be an inconvenient mode of arrangement - It was not necessary to marshal citizen against citizen, friend against friend and brother against brother in the open streets; besides in similar cases (contested elections) it had never been done in the town. It was practicable to poll the house in the Court House chambers, or in the hall below stairs, without going into the streets. The vote to adjourn into the street for the purpose of being counted, was put and lost. A middle course was then adopted, with a view to reconcile the jarring interest which seemed to exist in the meeting. It originated from the suggestion of the Selectmen - This was for the inhabitants to go into the lower hall of the building, passing out of the North and South doors - those in favoura of sending 9 to pass out the North door, and those opposed to sending that number to go out the South door - and to be counted by the Selectman standing inside of the building, and previous to passing the steps of the doors. The inhabitants present generally followed this plan, though it was remarked that some of the Federalist remained behind, and would not come forward to be counted. .... Upon the return of the Selectmen to the Court House Chamber, they declared the number in favor of sending 9 representative was 415, who had passed the north door (Republican) - and 145 opposed to that number, who passed out the south door (Federalist). Whereupon the Selectmen declared that the town had agreed to send 9 representatives and the citizens immediately began to deposit their votes in the usual and accustomed manner. The Federalist being foiled in all their efforts to reduce the number of representatives below 9, and failing too in their exertions to defeat the election, they retired from the house, pretending the whole of the proceedings were illegal. It was 12 o'clock before the vote fixing the number of representative was finally settled, and the poll was kept open to 4 o'clock, P.M." Salem Register (Salem, MA). May 26, 1806.
"The number of scattering votes were about 5 or 6." Salem Register (Salem, MA). May 26, 1806.
Eastern Argus (Portland, ME). May 15, 1806.
Salem Register (Salem, MA). May 26, 1806.
These election records were released on 11 January 2012. Versions numbers are assigned by state. Alabama, Arkansas, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Missouri, North Carolina, Ohio, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee and Virginia are complete and are in Version 1.0. All other states are in a Beta version. For more information go to the about page.