Phenix gazette. [volume] (Alexandria [D.C.]) 1825-1833, 1833-01-08

and the question Of order was argued at large
BY Messrs WIckiiff., Adams El Ellsworth, lryin,
Taylor, Wayne, Williams, u Everett, R,ed,
of Massachusetts,
The Speakers decision was sustained bv himself
upon the ground thatwhateverdoubtt there might be
as to the strict letter of the rules. this Bill came
clearly within their reason aud spirit. These
rules. he maintained, were the laws Of the House,
intended 10 govern their proceedings, and ought.
therefore, to be construed according to their OBJ
vious intent and sp,rlt-the good to be obtained
by them, or the evils guarded against. So long
as he presided the deliberations Of the House,
he should pursue this course in the discharge Of
his duties, and IN constituting aud expounding its
rules.
The object If these rules could not be msun-
dersto0d. They were intended TO guard against
precipitate legislation, and to afford every opp"r-
tunity for free discussion and debate on all sub
jects touching the appropriation of money, or I'M
posing a tax or charge upon the People. This
Bill creates new Office, AID fixes salary. tho
the appropriafing clause is omitted, Hence 1t
was said not to fall within the operation OF the
rules.
The Chair maintained that the omission of the
appropriatng clause made no difference; it was
of a character which rendered it peculiarly liza
bic to the operation of these rules. The Chair
proceeded 10 shovsthe danger Of such construc-
ton. and the manner in which the benefits aud
spirit OF the rules would be defeated.
What benefit would arise from the committai
OF bill apprcpriating sum OF money, after
the law had fixed the office, and salary, and the
appointment had been made and the duties per.
formed? The appropriation would follow as
matter of course. He lnstsnced the cases OF
President, Judges, and Officers Of the United
States. What benefit, in fact. arose from com
mttng bill approprla'ng the funds t" pay thems
None Bnt suppose bill to raise the salary OF
all these officers, Is il not apparent that the COM
mitment If the Bill IN such case would be i'm
pnrtant: The CHAIR thought 1t an Important
decision and he felt gratifed that it would now
be settled by the solemn judgment OF the House
for thei, future action.
Mr.. Adams hereupnn Withdrew his appeal.
Mr.. Arnold asked the Speaker whether The
discussion which had been made, would now ap.
pear uTnn ths j"uina?
The Sneaker answered that it would not.
Mr Arnold then sand, as he considered the
.li,tu-sinn OF the Speaker as settling an impor-
tact principles principle which threw an adtii
Iinuai guard around the public treasury, ne vas
de.,rous Of having it upon the journal lie was
DESTROYS nf this Tor several reasons Ii guarded
the peoples money for one thing; and therefore
ought Ia =" upon the Journal. 1t will enable US
TO act unirur mlv on this subject and as he had
no other means of getting it upon the Journals
hut by renewing the appeal, he did so. although
he snnu.d vote to sustain the decision Of the
Cha,r. believing It to be right
Mr., Reed demanded the Yeas and Nays; which
being ordered. we're taken and stood as follows:
Yea, i62. Nays IA. So the decision of the Chair
was affirmed and the Bill was committed.