New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1874-02-17

denounce all such infamous bills whenever
they came. 1t will make the poor growers
of tobacco suffer for the benefit Of few
men. The law on the statute book was bad
enough and ought to be repealed, but these
bills were hundred times worse. The at
tempt was made to whitewash the bills by
contracting the fees, making slight re-
ductiOn, but that was all humbug.
Mr.. Wands. of Tangipahoa, called the
previous question, which the House refused
| to order.
| Mr.. Demas made short address on the
report, but was interrupted by call for
the order of the day. which had been twice
postponed.
Mr.. Heffner, of Caddo, rose to priv
legged question. He desired to appeal from
decision of the Chair on Saturday.
| Mr.. Stewart made the point that the order
of the day being called. Mr.. Heffnes was
out of order.
| The Chair ruled the point well taken. and
the order of the day was postponed thirty
minutes to enable the appeal to be taken.
From this time till the House adjourned
no business was entertained save the ques-
ton Of the appeal and motions to adjourn.
! The appeal was on the point of order of
| Mr.. Wands. Of Tangipahoa. that by in
| definitely postponing Senate bill No. 202.
House bill No. 226, having the same title.
could not be considered.
Mr.. Hetfner spoke on the question Of ap.
| peal. He claimed that the substitute was
u. a.
| erly before the House.
Mr.. Allan detailed the course OF both
bills, recited the course Of the House on
Saturday, and the ruling of the Speaker,
which he claimed was correct.
Speaker Lowell said the question before
the House was this: On Saturday House
bill No. 226 was under consideration; Mr..
Wands made the point Of order that bill
of the same purport, Senate bill No. 202.
had been indefinitely postponed. The his
tory of the case, as appeared by the journal
of January q, was that the latter bill had
been referred to the Committee on Ways
and Means. who had reported substitute
which had been indefinitely postponed.
When the substitute is postponed it carries
with it the principal. The journal records
the vote as SO to II. The Chair is unable
to learn as yet what the gentleman from
Caddo appeals from. If from the facts,
then he is referred to the journal. If from the
ruling whether it was from the decision
that the bills were the same because their
titles are exactly alike or that the original
was postponed when the substitute was
the gentleman must send up his appeal in
writing, that it may 60 on record.
Mr.. Hetfner said he did not appeal from
the facts, but from the construction Of law
by the Speaker.
The House refused to table the motion of
appeal, and also to adjourn.
Mr.. Allan called for the order of the day,
which was postponed one hour.
Mr.. Murrell, Of Madison, made few re.
marks, again stating the question of appeal
Mr.. Montaldo demanded vote, saying
the House perfectly understood the ques-
ton.
The titles of both bills were read
Mr.. Murrell, of Madison, would vote to
sustain the ruling, for it was evident that
the Speaker could have decided in no other
way. If he had decided the bill was not post
pOned the effect would be to render null |
every action of the House. If the appeal |
was sustained every vote the House had |
taken could be reconsidered
Several members raised various points, |
and the bills were read second and third |
time.
Mr.. Davidson expressed the opinion that |
the ruling was correct according to the |
rules and action of the House, and could not |
see how in the name of God and common |
sense the Speaker could have decided |
otherwise.
Mr.. Rodriguez called the previous ques.
ton.
The Speaker again stated the question, |
and the House ordered the main question. |
The appeal of Mr. Heffner. of Caddo, on
the ruling of the Chair, was carried, and
the Speaker overruled by a vote Of 81 to AZ.
Mr.. Allan moved to reconsider the vote. |
and arguedi that the House had erred on |
parliamentary grounds. l
Some spicy debate followed.
Mr.. Mathews in the chair.}
ton Of appeal was out of order. The
Chair had made NO ruling; it had been an
action of the House. Would the House sus-
tain an appeal from that action If 80,
what security was there for the stability OF /
any vote it had taken on any question. He /
hoped no such action would go on record /
He called for the order of the day.
Mr.. Souer moved to postpone until ten
o'clock at night.
Mr. Benham suggested that the orders of
the day were not appropriate for the night.
A motion to adjourn, motion to table
the motion to postpone and subsequent
motion to adjourn were lost.
Mr. Allan made the point that the ques-
ton of postponement was out order; that
under the rules such motion could not be
entertained.
The Chair decided adversely and Mr.. AL
lain appealed.
On Mr.. Montaldo's motion the appeal was
laid on the table.
Speaker Lowell resumed the chair.
Mr.. Mathews said the motion was out of
order, as the motion to postpone the order
of the day for one hour was before the
House.
The IN otion to postpone was carried.
Mr. Martinez then moved to lay the mo-
lion to reconsider on the table, which was
carried, and the House adjourned.
DENTIsTRY.-New Orleans has always
been famed for the skill of her dentists,
/
,ity to see the Carnival should take advan-