Eastern times. [volume] (Bath, Me.) 1846-1857, 1850-05-30
EASTERN TIMES.
Bath, Thursday, May 80, 1850.
legislative Proceedings.
AUGUSTA, May e5, IS,

on Wednesday, IN relation 10 the recepliou Oh u
Resolve from the House, providing for the
election ola L. S Senator, was very ably con-
Quoted on both sides. The Senate having pre-
viously adopted Rule, postponins to day
certain the consideration OF the Senator ques-
ton, the "point of order was raised on the
ruling of the chair that Resolve from the
House in relation to this subject, should be
received and treated in the same manner as
other papers from the House. Mr. Chase, Sen
a,or from Washington County, the author OF
the original order, and who, It'll conceded on
I'll sides is one of the ablest debaters at the
Senate board. interposed objections to the re-
eeu,ion of the Resolve, contendins that, after
the vote passed by the Senate the Resolve from
the House was not in order, and ought not to
be entertained by the Senate. The chair an
nounced that it had bestowed some attention
upon the subject, and was fully persuaded that
the Resolve must be treated in the same man
ner as other papers from the House, and quot
ed Cushing's Manuel in support. Ihereupon,
Mr.. Cary expressed his reluctance at the nee
cssity which compelled him to appeal fromsuch
a decision. He considered the question put at
rest by the vote Of the Senate, passed last
week and that it was not in order to take the
subject into consideration until the goth of
June The two orders manifestly contiicted'-
MIR. Prince thought that they did not conflict
one assigning the Goth of June. and the other
declaring that no day shall be assigned before
that rime Mr.. Pickard considered it IN order
TO take up any subject from the House. con-
tending that if separate action can be had upon
subjects requiring concurrent action, an emu
would be put to all legislation. MIR. Shepley
contended that the order of the Senate Is
special rule, prohibiting concurrent as well as
separate action-and that if a proposition comes
from the House for action on the subject, that
proposition must lie on the table until the Gay
limited by the special rule. Mr.. S. entered in
TO a constitutional argument TO support his
position, contending that, according to parlla-
mertary law rule, order, or bye-law, adopted
bv delbcrative body for lis action, can only
be suspended or waived by common consent
which position he fortified by quoting from
Cushins's and Jeffcrson's Manual, and other
works. This was parliamentary law-but, said
Mr. S., the rules and orders adopted by the
Senate, modify parliamentary law, as vide sist
rule, which establishes that "Rules may be dis
pcnsed with by the consent of too thirds OF tie
members present" precisely as statute law reg
ulates or modiies common law. The rule then
can be suspended only by two-thirds vote
Mr.. Cary followed, declaring that if the Sen
ate can lay the resolve on the table by major
ity, it can take it up by a majority, and thus
render the Senate rule nugatory. As TO the
power CT the Senate to pass the order, 1t has
the same power to limit the action as on any
bill coming from the House. 1t is no uncom-
mon thing to assign future day for action on
bills from the House. Mr.. Pickard said this
is matter which requires concurrent action
OF the two houses. If the Senate can pass an
order that they will not act on one subject,
they can pass the same order with regard to all
suhiects-and bills may be sent up from the
House which cannot be acted upon here except
ty general consent. The President then stat
ed that the same question was in order sec
ond time, in different stages ofprcceeding. Mr..
Morrow conceded with the chair. The order
of the Senate was a simple one, and has not the
force of rule of the Senate. The subject re-
uuires Joint action and he did not believe that
a mere majority could thus bind or lie up the
hands of the Senate. Mr.. Chase contended
that any action on the subject is contrary to
parliamentary law and to all usage. The Sem
ate has elected by its vote the time and man.
ner of going into the subject. If this rule is to
be dis,egardsd. all presidents, all rules, all
votes are of no force-and all our proceedings
arc afoat The dignity of the Senate requires
US to adhere to our position. Mr.. Cary con-
tended that the question of resembling should
have been submitted to the Senate-the Re
solve should be received, but the Senate should
not act upon it. Messrs Prince, Pickard, and
Morrow contended that such construction
would put it in the power of an accidental ma
jority 10 control the whole subsequent proceed
ings of the Senate. Mr.. Cary referred to the
practice in Congress, declaring that papers not
in order there, at any particular time, are not
taken up, except by general consent. If one
member objects, the paper lies on the table,
Mr.. Hobbs of Oxford said that he voted for
the Senate order, but had questioned since,
whether it was not indecorous to the other
house. Knowing but little of the rules he
should incline to sustain the decision of the
chair, whose business it is to look into such
matters. Mr.. Cary would not fix his faith on
any mans sleeve, but would decide according
TO the dictates of his own judgment. Mr..
Bartlett felt some embarrassment on this sub
iect and had felt it ever since the order claim
ing to control the Senate was passed. He would
maintain the due authority ofrues and orders,
at all times. He apprehended from the first,
that the Senate order would embarrass its &C.
ton There are rules which seem to require
the Senate to act on propositions coming from
the House-aud whether the Senate, by an ar
bitrary order, can control those rules, he felt
some degree of doubt. He moved that the
whole matter lie on the table.
On the following day, the discussion was
resuIned,'he President citing Jefiersons, Cush-
hs ana sunderland's Manual, to sustain the
pesition-that the same question is in order in
inherent Stages of bill or measure. and tina,
vote OF one branch only cannot onarata 20
pte'eh' concurrent action. Mr.. Cary could not
see the pertinency of the au,hor;,;.. NJ
Shepley reiterated his former pos;,;or -.
ting that under the authorities c;,aa -,
chair, the order Of the Senate could !. !.
charged, to quote the exact term-but N 80
mission of the question second time to tho