In what was a test of the dedication of its members, the Undergraduate Council held its final meeting of the year last night.

The meeting, which lasted five-and-a-half hours, was filled with confusion, last-minute legislation, occasional lack of quorum and was punctuated by the continual sound of the gavel straining to keep order.

But in the end, the council managed to select three new members for its Election Commission, pass 14 bills and inaugurate its new president and vice-president.

Quorum was a particular problem throughout the night.

As it was the last meeting of the year, President Robert M. Hyman '98-'97 suggested that council members who were leaving the meeting resign so that the council could maintain quorum with a smaller number of people.

Council members technically serve until the election of new members at the beginning of the fall semester, but the council does not meet during that time.

Several council members expressed disgust at the way the meeting was conducted, saying that the council should not conduct business in such a haphazard manner.

"To ask people to resign to maintain quorum is truly appalling," said Justin E. Porter '99. "It does not allow for representation of the student body."

Council members attempted to maintain quorum and defeated several motions to adjourn because they wanted to address legislation rather than put it aside until next year.

One cause of the confusion last night was a dispute over the Election Commission.

The three members of this year's commission, which oversaw the recent popular elections of next year's council president and vice president, all resigned within the last week.

Thus, the council needed to seat an entirely new Election Commission to run the fall general elections.

Although the council approved the three members selected by the executive board earlier this week, a motion was later made by Rudd W. Coffey '97 to reconsider the decision because he felt he was not adequately considered for a post on the commission. Coffey ran unsuccessfully for council president in the popular elections held several weeks ago.

Some members of the council said it should not reconsider something it had already approved, but others questioned the process by which the executive board selected the commission members.

Hyman acknowledged that the executive board's voting procedure was irregular because the Campus Life co-chairs, who usually split one vote, had two votes in this decision.

Others said that the challenge was personally motivated and that the council should stick with its original decision.