Constantine republican. [volume] (Constantine, Mich.) 1836-1838, 1838-02-07

On II lCH Of The DEDd II, w We
Senate, on Friday, Jan. 26. in relation TO
the appointment Of committee TO act
Jointly Nth the 20 amitiee of The House, 10
Investigating the matter Of Railroad Lo.
cations.
Mr.. WOODBRIDGE opposed the c.
mendmcnt. The Senate should be very
careful in the phraseology ola resolution Of
lha. nature ; the language of the amend
ment would imply doubt of the capacity
or honorable intention Of some members Of
the Senate it is also putting it in the power
of small m,jo i'y, to neulralize the invest.
CATION altogether. He would prefer to see
that the report ofthe joint committee should
embrace all the facts and evidence which
had come before the committee, and that
the minority should not only be permitted,
but requested TO report, SO as to elieit-te
views on both sides. He did not wish to- ),
see the matter in the power Of The majority
or minority, because it would have the ef.
feet of nipping in the bud all inquiry or in.
vesiigation.
Mr.. BARRY said, that when the project
of a Join; resolution, of the character Of tho
one now under consideration, had been first
suggested TO the Senate, it was then the a.
vowed object ofgentlemen not to merge the
committee of the Senate ia the committee
OF the House, but merely to permit the, two
committees to sit together, for the purpose
Of hearing such testimony as might be Of
fered in relation 10 the subject matter Of the
proposed investigation. To such pror.
osition he should raise no objection. In.
deed, ii might facilitate the transaction of
business in both branches fthe legislature;
and more especially, that portion Of bust.
ness relating 10 internal Improvements =
Such course would, at one and the same
time, secure to each committee knowledge
of all facts in relation to the propriety Of
the present location of railroad routes, and
also in relation 70 the conduct of commits.
sioners, whose actions had been impugned.
lie was, however, opposed to the original
resolution; because il contemplated that
one committee should be merged in the 9th.
or. |, was TO prevent this joint action and
merger, that he had offered the amendment.
| A repon made to the Senate, and on which
action Of the Senate is to be prcdicated,
should be report of a committee Of this
body, and not rcrort made by persons in
the streets, or by committee OF the House
Of Representatives. A report made by
| Joint committee, may not contain the views
of the committee appointed on the part OF
the Senate. If two reports be made by
this joint committee, one by the majority
and the other by the minority, still we are
not secure of obtaining, in either, the opin-
ions ola majority of our own committee.
He (Mr. B. therefore deemed it the most
consise eat and proper course for the com.
mi;tees TO act separately; and that no &C.
ton should be had by either, except in the
presence Of majority of its MEMBERS
This, he contended, was tho most consis-
tent with ana'ogy-with the organization
of the two houses, and with parliamentary
usages. In the reception OF evidence, it had
been suggested that Inconvenience might
ensue, if the TWO committees were TO ac
separately; but he thought that each com.
mt:ee nigh: order its secretary 10 note
!. down all evidence offered, and at n suisse
qucnt meeting, determine in regard to it
pertinence. He (Mr. BARRY said that |
. resolution containing provision requiring
the Senate to meet the Honse, and boil
jointly to vote IN the final acton to be hat
on the passage of BILL would not be more
anomalous in its character, than the requi
!, sition proposed to be made upon the tw'
committees TO make a joint report, on which
q is to be predicated the separate action o
each branch of the legislature. So far a
!. regarded the investigation proposed. h
| cnr 9TH, To nj
!. iniquity but he wished the proceedings L
"a be characterised by consistency. He though
the Senate would find itself in an awkwar
:, predicament when called upon to act on tn
: Joint report, in the event that report did no
express the views of majority of the com
mitee of the Senate and this event, b
y commended, was not only possible, but eve
~ probable. The objection that the lnvestlga
'e ton might be frustrated, by the refusal q
"a members to attend, would as well apply I
% any other committee appointed by the Scr
" ate, and he could not, therefore, see its al
!. propriate application to this particular case
,e Mr.. WOODBRIDGE observed, th'
m when Joint committee was appointed,
y understood it to be firm, united bod
IN which acts by the majority; the two hol
m SEES arc merged, and the action consists /
NJ the joint cooperation Of the both. tt
h. amendment appeared to him TO be an anonl
Id lous proceeding.
er Mr.. BRADFORD observed, that the
o. mandatory resolutions, just offered by h
III colleague from st. Joseph, (Mr. BARRy,)
~ The resolution offered by the Senator fro
VI Washtenaw, (Mr. KINGSLEY were, to
ed mind, very liable to the complaint made |
ay Horace, in his dissertation on the roel
10 art, Of an unnatural and absurd fashion pr
Nv vaent among the poets of his day--of d
or sociations, ideas and objects the most d
nd cordant and dissimilar in their writings, a
III. which he resembled TO the folly that wou
a be committed by painter, # he placed
"a his canvass the head Of horse on {
shoulders of man. His colleagues
so mendmenis. when attached 10 and incerr
he rated with the original resolution, would c.
S. tainly and strongly resemble such NC
ar. s,rous anomaly. For what did the anne
,li- datory resolutions propose, il not separ
mr.. action thro',g hout, by q joint committee
led An absurdity in terms. lie believed thu
sni to be offered for the purpose of defeati
len the original resolution; and az he was
ce. favor of hearkenipp 10 the public voice