The Evansville journal. [volume] (Evansville, Ind.) 1866-1870, 1869-07-01

In refusing to elect, or OF the elecJe0 /
in refusing to continue members, and |
it is a maxim of law that parties shall |
not take advantage of their own
wrong, and it is a maxim of good
sense and political wisdom that it is
better that the Government should
survive rather than perish through
the action of minority.
2. Legal and Legislative PrecedeatS.
| will now proceed to support my
position as to the quorum, By authorl-
ties. They are of two classes-Judl-
cial and Legislative.
NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS. VS.. Pal
myra, ETC.; 2 Michigan, 287. Sedg-
wick on Statues, p. 574.
The case in Michigan is not an elab-
GRATED one; but as it was decided
some length of time before the late
war, and is opposed by no other de-
cision, 1t is entitled to consideration
by this Court.
2-LeqisldtiUe Administrations
dents. These are relied upon by the
other side, and if they are to have
weight In the decision of the case at
bar. I only ask that the preponderance
shall carry the decision. | am willing
to risk it on that.
The Constitution of the Unite d
States provides that the Senate of the
United States shall be composed of
two Senators from each State, and
that majority thereof shall constl-
tute quorum. Under this provision
down to 1861, the practice of the Sen
ate, its precedents, had not been uni
form, and no occasion had arisen rem
| dering a thorough examination and
authoritative decision as to the true
construction of the provision, neces-
sary. In 1890, January 4th: there
were twelve States in the Union,
and thirteen would have been
a quorum of all the Senators ;
yet one being dead, twelve was
held a quorum. Congressional Globe,
1861-62, pp. 3191. The Constitu-
ton also provides that a majority OF
the House of Representatives, possl-
bly, consisting of a certain known
number at each session, though vary
! ing from session to session, shall be
quorum. The practice of the House,
as we'll as the Senate, had not been
uniform touching the quorum down
to 1861. In the House, December z,
| 1902. seventy one would have been a
quorum of full House, but sixty
seven being a. majority OF the quail
fed members" was held a quorum.
And December z, 1903, a quorum OF
the whole number provided by the
Constitution would have been seventy
one, but fifty nine were held quo
rum, being a majority of the quail
i fed voters. COngres. lOnGL Globe
1862, page 1892. So again, in
! 1901, on the proposal of the
constitutional amendment, it was de-
cided by the Senate, then being
Democratic, but voting without party
distinction, that tWo-thirds of the
Senate, within the meaning of article
of the Constitution. meant two
thirds of the existing qualified mem
bers. There are also preeedents the
other way. But in the Spring of 1861
an event occurred which compelled
an authoritative decision of what con-
stitutes a quorum of the Senate and
House of Representatives of the
! United States. This event was the
resignation of a large number of the
members of the United States Senate.
To show that a case was made clearly
in point with that now before the
courts, [ quote the provision of the
Constitution Of the United States
touching the National Legislature
and its quorums:
1.-THE House of Representatives
shall be composed of members chosen
each second year. by the people of the
several States The number of Re
representatives. shall not exceed one for
every thirty thousand, but each State
shall have one.
The Senate of the United States shall
be composed of two Senators from
| each State. x. X. A majority
of each House shall constitute quo
rum to do business, but a smaller
number may adjourn from day TO day,
and compel the attendance of absent
membes."
Under these provisions, Mr. Cush-
ing, in his Parliamentary law, section
266, lays 1t down that quorum con-
sists of majority of the members of
which the House or Senate may con-
sist under the Constitution, not of the
number of which it. at any given
time, actually does consist; a majority
of the possible, not of the actual
i House or Senate, and he cites as
authorities for his position part of the
presidents of Congress down to the
18th. He cites some of those
occurring within the last fifteen years,
and some Of those against him prior
to that time, and [ might have dis
posed of Mr.. Gushing as authority in
the case. by simply stating the fact
that every precedent on which he
relies has since been over-ruled.
In the Spring of 1861, as / have
said, it became necessary to authori-
tatively settle the question as to what
was quorum of the Senate and of
the House. In April, 1862, the fol-
lowing resolution vas before the Sen
ate of the United States:
ResOlUed. That a majority Of the
Senators duly elected, and entitled to
seats In this body, is constitutional
quorum. Congressional Globe, 1861
'62, p. 3,O21.
A similar resolution as to the QUO
rum OF the House had been introduced
into that body in 1861, and without
distinction of party it passed on the
ground OF necessity, and that such was
the fair and proper construction of
the constitutional provisions on the
subject. Con. Globe, supra, D. 1922.
The above copied resolution was
thoroughly discussed in the Senate,
precedents being collected, and the
debates in the Federal Convention
examined and criticised, } from April,
1862, down to the 4th of May, 1866.
when it was adopted in the following
form:
RESOLVED, That a quorum of the