The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1852-03-11
The Old Legislature and the Ner-1he
Modern Legislature Ruies.

Modern Legislature Rules.
The Dispatch of Saturday contrasied the
old Legislature of Virginia with the new one.
Its comparison was decidedly favorable to the
old Legislature, which was, in oil the respects
of its dignity, its mode of doing business us
general ORDER and propriety, very much tue
superior OF the Legislature OF recent years.
The causes of the decline must be numerous,
and not the least of them is that arrangement
of the Hall itself alluded to by us, which en-
couraees ina,tenton to the general business of
legislation, introduces the private matters Of
members into the Hall, and by occupying their
attention aith other concerns, diminishes their
general wa.chfnlness of the course Of business,
and delays aud confuses legislation. There
has been great change in men and customs.
Political ethics have been very much altered
the dangerous doctrine of the end justifying
the means, is more ruling principle than in
former times. The farther we are removed
from the revolutionary days. the more is public
virtue diminished.
When we FIRST knew the Legislature OF |ir-
sinia, its members seemed to be far more de-
voted to the welfare of the Commonwealth,
and their councils were less COMPOUNDED by the
strife and intrigue of localities. They entered
the Hall, as the great Temple of the State,
where solemn public duties devolved upon them
where their obligations TO the Common
realth were of sacred character, and not TO
be interfered with by personal or local consi-
derations. There vas a more serious and de.
voted attention to matters under consideration,
and more intelligent and perfect action upon
the public affairs. Bills were read and studied
what concerned one part Of the State, it was
thought very reasonably might concern all
and If it did not, members satisfied themselves of
the TACT by understanding the bills. Rules were
not considered idle things TO be rescined when
ever their rescission INDUCED a lazy propensity,
or whenever they opposed any diffiulty in the
way of improper legislation. The ceremony OF
reading bills was not deemed all idle one-andit
was adhered to. Intrigue for the passage of
local schemes for depredating upon the Trea-
sury-the modern log -rolliGg-ihe combining
for public plumber was not practised, and
though men might have been Influenced in a
rational aud reasonable manner by mutual
sympathies, there was not such thing as an
understanding for the casting Of votes for mu-
tual advantage.
Business, although never hurried over as il
is now-a days, was transacted with even more
despatch. Such a thing as ordering all the
bills on The Clerks table to be read BIZ their
titles was unknown; yet we have often known
this 10 be done Of late years. When the mo-
ton to read bills by their titles was first made.
ii was secuted by the House. The Speaker
expressed his adherence of so disposing of the
public business; and, tor a time, the motions to
get over business in that way had to be con-
fined to special bills. After session or two.
however, such motion did frequently prevail.
and the Clerk read the bills by their titles,
which was just not reading them at all Some
few members-ambassado from simpler and
more sincere age archaeological and resisted.
aud demanded the reading of bills but as the
general order was for dispensing with the read
ing Of all bills, and to get them read, they had
in each case to demund the reading, their pa
thence was finally worn out, and they aban.
doned their ground in disgust.
The Precious Question, too--one of the
most odious of Legislative rules-in course of
time became to be one of the most familiar
measures of the House. Prior to 1885. We
believe, it was almost unknown in the progress
of Virginia legislation. About that time par,v
feeling ran very high-the two parties in the
Legislature were nearly divided, and the an;.
mosiiies excited in debate prompted the resort
to this expedient that had been abhorrent to all
Virginia statesmen, AMI the want of which had
hardly ever before been admitted in the State.
At the time it was applied under the impulse
OF strong passions. it was s,igmatised by the
name Of the "gag." Since that day, however,
it has become less obnoxious-indeed it has
become to be very appropriate rule; and the
member who gets up to cut short our modern
dcbaters in the midst of their discussions, is
hailed with pieasure-hs rising as the advent
of deliverer from food to which there is no
limit but through his Intervention. The pro-
priety of the frequent resort to this rule at the
present day, is a striking illustration of the
decline of public bodies in decorum, and intel
ligent and dignifed proceeding. When Wisdom
and Character were treated with the respect
due TO theni-when men acted under an ele-
waited and enlightened sense OF public duty
there was no necessity for the LIMITATION of de-
hate. But when party feeling governed Legis-
la,;ye action. and men became to think more of
their party, their little districts and themselves,
than they did of the State, the day of slang
dawned, a new class Of orators appeared, and
the iood.gate of proGtless gable were opened
upon the land. II the Previous Question
odious in former days--has done something to
surtail this, it has done the country some SER
vice.
Blu. all the sighting and slurring of the
public business, with the Previous Question to
help, did not facilitate proceedings in the long
run. Our modern statesmen found out this,
and for the first time, endeayord to force them
sefces along by shortening the session in the