Daily Richmond Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1865-1869, 1866-04-28
'ery truly, yours, &C.,
J. II. GILMER.
STAUNToN, March 81, 1866.
John II. Gilmer, Esq,

John II. Gilmer Esq
DEAR SIR-Yours of 10Th instant postmarked
25th, was received last night.
understand you to claim that the bill allowing
eight per cent. interest, by contract, is law"
The facts bearing upon the question are as fol-
lows:
l. The bill originated in the Senate, and, having
passed that body, was sent to the House of Dele
gates
. On 25th February, the bill passed the House,
and on Goth the fact communicated to the
Senate.
8. On 26th February, the House reconsidered the
passage of the bill, and upon reconsideration re-
jected it, which fact was, on 9th, communicated to
the Senate.
The rules of the Hoase of Delegates relating to
the subject are
LINN When a question has been decided it may
be recOnsidered, on the motion of any member who
voted with the prevailing side; provided, it be made
the same day, or within the next two days Of ac
tual session." p
"LXXXv. 1t shall be the duty of the Clerk,
without any special order therefor, to communicate
to the Senate any action Of the House upon business
coming from the Senate, or upon matters requiring
the concurrence of that body; but no such cOnimu-
RicdtOn shall be made in relation TO any action Of
the House Irhiie IL remains open for reCOnSiderd-
ton"
The part Of the last mentioned rule UNDERSIGNED
byne had been suspended for the remainder of the
sessiOn-several days before 18th of February.
These being all the material facts, as understand
| the matter am unable to concur in your opinion
that this Bill is now Law.
presume there can be no doubt that a motion TO
reconsider the passage of this BILL made within the
time required by rule TO- would have been legitimate
if no message had, in the meantime. been sent to
/ the Senate. You distinctly admit this when YOU
say, But until this action of the House was, in a
regular way, under the rules, communicated 10 the
Senate by the Clerk, or otherwise, the House held the
| bill under its triH"
You SEEM however, to be under the impression
that the message 10 the Senate placed the bill be-
yOnd the reach of the House irithOut The cOaeurriRg
iviH Of the Senate, procured By formal resolution
requesting the return Of the biH" The fact is, on
the contrary that the bill was not sent back to the
Senate, but properly remained in possession of the
House, and nothing went to the Senate but the mere
fact that the bill had passed the House. The House
then being in possession of the BILL and the motion
to reconsider being made in due time the reconsid-
Grafton was strictly in order and the rejection of the
bill was legitimate.
1t is not true however, that the right to reconsider
ceases when the bill passes out of the possession Of
the House. There is a rule to that effect in the
United States Senate, (No. 2O) but the rule in the
House of Representatives mo. 49) from which our
rule is taken is different, and has been the subject OF
frequent construction upon this very point.
Thus, in Barclays Digest, edition 1856 page
1854 il is stated that "a motion to reconsider if
made in time, may be entertained, Notwithstanding
the papers connected with the original proposition
have gone out of the possession of the House. And
pending motion to reconsider the vote on the pas
sage OF BILL the Speaker should decline to sign the
said bill, if reported by the Committee on Enrolled
Bills" ~
So in Cushing page SOS section 1874: Though
motion for reconsideration NAV ba made ond az
cussed in the absence Of paper to which IL riotas
yet if decided in the affirmative, it will he wboIIv
imperative and Intellectual, until the paper in ones
ton IS IN possession of the House. The first sten
therefore, after rOte to reconsider to send 10 The
other branch or to the Executive for the paper. in
reference to which the vote to reconsider passes or