Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1850-08-31
THURspAY, AUGUST 29, 1850.


THURSDAY, AUGUST 30, 1850.
The SPEAKER stated that the regular order Of business
the consideration of the report made yesterday by Mr.
STANLr, from the Select Committee appointed the 9th of
May last 30 inquire and report to the House OF Representa-
ves what persons holding Office under the last Adminsra
ton were correspondents Of newspapers wrote for or edited
papers, the salaries and compensation for the same and
in particular the author Of certain signed Bum
decund and also whether, during the last for the
Presidency any officers absened themselves from their offices
and official duties make speeches and public addresses
against the election Of General Tayor and also whether any
officers during the said called upon to subscribe
pay money for eleconeeng fund against General Tay
lor, and at whose instance it done.
Mr. FITCH being entitled to the floor, made remarks IN
justification Of the refusal Of Mr. Richie to the in
teogaos of the committee to who were the authors Of
of certain articles which appeared in the Union during
the last Presidential He maintained that there
was no principle of law violated by such refusal.
Mr. EVANS of Maryland, next addressed the House, and
was followed by Mr. sCHENCK, whose remarks were in
teruped by the expiration Of the morning hour.
On the motion Of Mr.. MCDONALD, the House proceeded
to the consideration of the business on the Speakers table,
THE TEXAS BOUNDARY BILL.
The SPEAKER stated that the first business in order was
the consideration Of the bill Of the Senate entitled An act
proposing the State of Texas the establishment Of her
northern and western boundaries the REIMBURSEMENT by the
said State of all territory claimed by her exterior to said
boundaries and of all her claims to the United States The
first question upon the amendment offered by the gen.
tleman from Kentucky mr. BorD,) and that gentleman
was entitled TO the floor.
Mr. MEADE rose to q point Of order. His point Of or
der based upon the 9th rule of the House, which pre-
scrbed the order in which the business the Speakers
table should be taken up The following the third
clause of the Rle:
asd BILLS md resolutions from the Senate on their first
and second ding that they be referred to committees and
put under way but n being read second time no mo.
ton be made to commit they to be ordered to their third
reading unless objection be made which case not 9TH
erwise ordered by majority of the House, they are to be
laid the table, in the general file OF bills on the Speakers
table, to be taken up in their turn
He understood that the bill its third reading
No" "nor] That being the case, this rule required
that the bill be laid the Speakers table, nthe general file
of bills to be taken up in their turn Now, he submitted to
the Chair that this bill its third reading When the
amendment Of the gentleman from Kentucky offered, it
was its third reading having been read the second time
He submitted that under the rule unless otherwise ordered
by maiority Of the House, this bill should be laid the
Speakers table, to take its turn in the order OF business
being certainly bill from the Senate its third reading
The SPEAKER ovcruled the point of order, and stated
that this business in orde the first business on bis
table, on the ground that it unfinished business of the
House at the time when the House last had under consde
ration the business the Speakers table, If the gentleman
examined the 9th rule which he had read, he would find
that that portion of it had reference to bills Of the Senate
ordered third reading, and their passage The rule
was that the bill being read first and second time and no
motion being made commit it. that should be ordered to
third reading, unless objection made in which case
that is when ordered third reading-if not other
wise ordered by majority of the House, it was to be laid on
the table, in the general file Of bills the Speakers table, to
be taken up in turn When the House ordered the bill to
second reading the question then its third reading
majority could order the bill to be read third time immedi
atey provided it engrossed if was not engrossed it
could not be ordered third reading In the opinion Of
the Chair when the House had thus taken the business
the Speakers table, that business unless the House had
ried it to different stage from which it when they pass
ed from the consideration Of it provided under this clause
Of the rule up unfinished business and was the first
business in order under the rule.
Mr. THOMPSON, Of Mississippi, appealed from the deci
sion of the Chair He thought the genteman from Virginia
was right and differed from the Chair He called the aen
ton of the Chair the fact that there bill from the
Senate bill in which large section of the country
nteested-whch stood precisely the position in which this
bill Stood 1t stood having been read first and second
time with amendment pending, and the previous question
moved He then argued against the decision of the Speaker
Mr. McLANE of Maryland, thought the gentleman from
Mississippi was wrong He submitted to the House that if
there any other taken than that suggested by the
Chair there would be place where the bill could 60 I'm
less the bill ordered third readings the 9th rule
would not have been executed.
Mr. JONES wished to know if this question debatabe;
whether question in relation 10 the priority of
business
The SPEAKER replied that it might probably be consider
ed as question Of priority Of business but as 1t was an i'm
porant question, the Chair allowed debate.
Mr. ASHMUN said that, believing that all this debate
unnecessary he would to lay the appeal the table,
The SPEAKER wished to make statement to the gentle
man from Mississippi reference to the bill Of the Senate to
man from Mississippi stating that the bill from the Senate
in reference the grant of land the State of Illinois
n the same condition the bill under consideration. II the
gentleman correct the Chair would rule that that bill had
priority and up this bill did, there being distnc
ton. There this difference The bill now before the
House taken up business the Speakers table, and
read the first and second me and pending the question
ordering il to be read third time the House adjourned hav
ing taken up and considered business the Speaker
table and this the that the Chair ruled it
finished business The Senate bill referred to by the gentle
from Mississippi taken up, read first and second
time and then referred TO of the standing committees
then reported back by the standing committee, and thus
brought before the House, and 10 that condition considered
by the House. When the House adjourned the bill went
the Speakers table the class Of business to which it
belonged.
The question taken the motion TO lay the appeal
the table, and it was agreed TO.
The SPEAKER stated that the gentleman from Kentucky
was entitled to the floor
Mr. MEADE wished TO object TO the third reading of the
bill as he understood now was the time to object.
The SPEAKER stated that the question upon the
amendment this not the stage to obec. to the third
reading Of the bill.
Mr.. BURT claimed the floor Of the gentleman from Ken
lucky. He did not know that the motion he proposed to
make was privileged question but he thought the Chair
yesterday decided enormously in holding that the gentle
man from Kentucky (Mr. BoYp) the floor to move
amendment il not in order for him Mr.. BURT) to
move to commit the bill The rule which had just been read
as the House remembered in these wordso much Of
it as related to the point he would read
But IL on being read second time motion be made
to they be ordered their third reading