New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1853-01-27
FRENCH SPOLIATIONS.
rse way In which The speaker gave the go
BY 20 the Bill for this session.

WASHINGTON, Monday, Jan "a, lo'S
The Journal Of rhe House, Monday, May 8,
lss2 contains the following entry:
J.un.l. p ess n,
he Uee rtsinmsui AID ~ act0 OF CLAIMS Of Arneresn
sits<rs spo4tons committed By the freDen roI
Slsg day Of July 1901. hfst and second unS
mi HbtsId moved tia, II uji.ed 2 the Com
sittss e the Wiols HOPE os the sat o. tas - IN,
Mr. Tbons. III Bsyly moved that Il BE- feieffeo % ~
ia, Ssaie, ,Iqt,S ne gussaoa u epon The n0ion rub
" 49, ID nsys were ordered thereon, sad then,
son nOt Of Sr. Humphrey ASfsns. !. = ISi"c''
NJ, the HOIss 81 jouroso until ts-sl' 81 =, =
On tbezGh day Of January ISS5 me house Voted
40 p,oeeed ~ business on the Speakers table.
Tbi. deei,iop having been rlsde, the order Of hui
nee, WINS a, foDows a. provided by House Rule No.
"a:
"I,t Message and other Executive Communications.
"M kesssges from toe senate and amendments pro
nod by 'he Senate 20 bills Of the House.
.sd Blk and resoot froa the senate on their 5rst
and ccpe resdIng hat nv be referred % Con 'fee' and
SSt sscey sovj bot n on being rssf second tne 70
noTtor BsIse sspg COMMIT. they 20 be ordered
70 their bird reading unless objection be made IN Fheh
sey are 20 be sd on the tbe IN the genera fe Of bson
tho SPEAKERS table ard 20 be taken IN their TIN.
"5to; Eng ossed bills AID bils tom TIE senate on then
5sS BIZ. Of the House and from the Senate On re
Speakers table their e3ossnent or On being ordered
70 third reading 70 be tsken up and considered the Or
der Of tine 10 winch they passed 70 second reading
1.-THE uieseFes, eOlmUucstiors and ois on MS taoe
having been dFposeo Of the speaker shall then proceed 20
call the orders Of the dsy"
The business under the frat and second heads 10 the
above Classification. having been disposed Of on the
Cob Of January, the Speaker announced Senate oil
ONo 800 To Prohibit Public Executions in the Dis
tyict Of Columbia the business in order.
Mr. Walsh, Of Nd, asked II the Senate bill Go. CD
In reference 70 the French spostio8s, did not have
precedence OF bill No 800. The Speaker replied that
IL did not inasnuch as the former belonged 10 the 9Th
nader RuIe the latter in the Sd
elsss.
From this decision Of the Speaker Mr.. Walsh ap-
pesled aud on motion 10 lay the appeal the table,
made BY Mr. venable, Of n C.. tie Speaker sus-
tsiDed, by vote Of 81 TO 20
The House Journal (p 6iG) contains the following
entry
"a message from the Senate, by Mr. D.ekns, their
ms srE.KER, The Senate have passed bill. of the FOL-
lowins titles, viz:
as g. An act 10 provide for the Ascertanent and Sat
isfsctiOn Of Claims o. American Citizens for sPoiaons
commit by the French pror 10 the 3st day Of July 1901
pc An 90 10 Prohibit Pooic E1sept e, 70 ,,s
concurrence ~ his House.
And tnen he vi bdfew'
No action had been taken upon either Of the iorego
ing bills except OF above stated. on the French bill,
May 3, 1852
hwas not denied but admitted that the French bill
wss put in order IN Is class 90 that the only question
was whether It belonged the 81 class to the 5h.
The Speaker 10 sustain hs decision. Obliged to
assume that the French bill lie engrossment, or
third readngas had already been eng rossed by the
6enaie il must have been the latter, " either.
The journal ssys expressly that the pending quo'.
ton when the House adjourned, May ., 1852 the
motion 10 commit he biz The speaker stated the qucs
ton TO be on that motion By what rule usage, or gu
thority wAs tbs, motion droppedi How happens i;
that the question, after the adjournment was, no, TO
commit but 10 order the bill to third reading Did
not the motion TO commit arrest the thrd reading Of
the bill until Il should b. put and lost aud 1t not
an objection to the third reading that time How in
the meantime could that motion lose It's place and
forcei Suppose the bin reached and before the
House. what would be the first question % be decidcd'
would 1, not be to COMMIT II NOT, why noti II il
would BE- TO commit then could no. be 10 order the
bin to third reading Tor how could the question be
upon the third reading, pending motion to commit
made in order and recognized by the g7th Rule a
motion proper be made upon bills in the class In
which this Is acknowledged % have been when the
ton wac madei
What l. the reason Of the classification prescribed 10y
the 27th Rule, and why do bal. on their fret and
second reading have precedence Of those their
grossmenii Plainly and expressly that they MAY
RrrEHREp ann rUT UNDER WAY" But the Speaker
oyenides or throws out the motion TO refer In this
case and by deciding the question TO be on giving the
bill third reading places il Ia the fifth class, and where
there lie not the antest prospect Of reaching il during
the present session-
But H. on being read q second time, No MOTION BE
"Mo MADE TO COMMIT they to be ordered 70 t4eir
veadns unles. objection be made, says the rule.
In ths case there wds motion to commit, aud.
therefore the bin could not then BE- ordered TO third
reading and 81 would GO into the dh class which
includes bills upon their engrossment and third read
ing, and no others.
Rule III provides thst upon the sccond reading Of
"a bill the Speaker shall state II as ready for commit
"ment OF engrossmeni." la case of Senate bill, al
ready engroesed il would he ready for commitment
for being ordered to third reading
This bill, on the 81 Of May, was ready FOR commit
men or for being ordered to q third reading Motions
to commit were made and entered upon the journal
and were undisposed Of when the House adjourned
Yet told that the question was on giving third
reading whom the adjournment took place, and that i
thereby foll into the fifth clsss
Upon motion To commit bill under consideration
at the expiration OF the morning hour a, adjourn
ment the uniform practice it is believed has been TO
regard the bill holding its place, and the s; 10 be
acted xpon when the House proceeds TO business
in the order or class in which such bull the exp
ration of the morning hour at the adjournment,
the case may be-
Thus the sd Of Jaly last the Speaker stated, upon
an appeal taken by M Davis Of Indiana, that under
1.-The uniform practice o. tho House based upon the
"25th rule, mo'ioa 70 oo-'s1 had be,a In pssdiSg
xAss tls Hssse passed fps s oensaerafirs, q rssi
Asrs rcsased - place IL rae RocsiRg kozr bzsises"
by the same rule and for the reason bill Ia
the 81 class there having been motion 10 eoHl.aii
when the House pssseG from It's consideration would
retain its place in the business Of that class.
From the foregoing exI ositOa will be seen tina; Mr.
Speaker Boyd hs. taken the responsibility 10 dees, the
passage ofthe French SpoAtion hlby vicleally ruling
Il out OF reach al the present session.
Frauds ON Scnmen In National Vessels, &c.
N.sft,xsxaaseac, sfIh he A. n nlhEB.