New-York tribune., 1875-02-26

the roll Then after the result had been announced
and 1T disclosed the absence of quorum, Gen. But
ler demanded that the Speaker, knowing that o
quorum was in the hall, should declare that fact
and so cause tho House to proceed with business
Mr. Blaine replied that such rulings as this had been
the basis of the worst parliamentary frauds that
had been perpetrated in State Legislatures. IL the
Speaker was allowed to go behind the record and
declare fact to be different from what the record
showed the House would be constantly sitting upon
q volcano.
Never during his whole service rs Speaker of the
House has Mr.. Blaine displayed to better advantage
his exceptional ability a parliamentarian and
presiding officer, his power to dispose instantly of
the most perplexng questions. His rulings invaria-
bly, were approved BY both sides of the House, and
If the Democrats appealed from them it was gener-
ally for the purpose of delay, and not because of
any doubt as to the correctness of his decisions.
Mr.. Randall. who led the Democrats, also displayed
his parliamentary skill to much better advantage
even than during tho long session over the Civil
Rights bill. Then he simply had to organize his
forces and proceed by given rule; last night the
proceedings were of q unique character and he
showed himself equal to the emergency. The order
in the House during the night was as good could
be expected At about midnight cushions were
taken from seats in the galleries and made into tenn
porary beds in the open spaces behind the desks and
upon these 90 30 members, in addition to those
who found places on the sofas, slept most of the
night. Now and then, when division OF the House
was called and they were aroused suddenly. much
sport caused by their sleepy and disOrdered
appearance
SENATOR MORTONS PRESIDENTIAL ELEC-
TION BILL.
AN UNSATISFACTORY DEBATE THEREON-THE MAIN
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE OLD AND NEW PLANS.
lBr TELEGRAPH TO THE TRIBUSE
WASHINGTON, Feb. 25.-The Senate to-day has
been engaged in discussing the bill offered by Mr..
Morton about three weeks ago, to provide for and
regulate the counting of votes for President and
vicePresident and the decision of questions arising
thereon This bill is intended to take the place of
the ed joint rule of both Houses adopted for the
same purpose in 1865 This rule provides, among
other things. that if, upon the reading of the cert
Gates of the electoral votes any question shall arise
in regard to the votes therein certified the Senate
shall withdraw and consider the question in its own
chamber, the House remaining and considering it
ALSO Ii the vote of any State is objected to 1t shall
not be counted, except by the concurrent votes OF
both Houses and debate shall take place in either
House in regard to the question before it. The bill,
which has been under consideration provides in lieu
of the above section that electoral vote or votes
from any State to the counting of which objections
have been made shall be rejected except by the af-
irmative vote of both Houses and that debate to
limited extent on such objection shall be allowed 1t
further provides that if than return shall
be received from State purportng to be the cerif-
Gates of electoral votes that return only from such
State shall be counted which the two Houses acting
separately sl each decide to be the true and valid
return.
The debate was q very general one, and great
| variety of opinions expressed in regard to 1t.
1t seemed to be generally conceded that, although
| in some respects it was an improvement upon the
old rule in others it was far The provision
| in regard to debate any votes objected to is
highly important and desirable one, the necessity
for which was manifested in the last election. when
the Arkansas returns were not impressed with the
great seal of the State for the reason
| that the State had such seal, fact
which the clerk attempted to convey to the
Senate but was prevented the Senators shouting
| for the regular order Another case also occurred
| where debate was needed when the Vice-President
decided that the vote of Georgia could be counted IL
| IL did not change the result The most important
difference between this bill and the twenty second
Joint rule is in regard the necessity of joint af-
frmative vote of both Senate and House to exclude
the vote of any State instead of a concurrent vote
| IN count it, 1t is difficult to understand the su-
neroritv of the former provision over the latter FOR
the rejection in one case the acceptance In the
other of the vote of State might be equally provo
| cative of harm.
| The whole discussion was very unsatisfactory
| one and few Senators seemed to be wholly pleased
| with the bill. Mr.. Edmunds advocated court OF
appeals, in case of differences, to consist
| of four members of each House, who, IN
| turn. should be overruled by the joint con-
vention The vote stood 90 to 20, Messrs Carpenter
Conkling, Edpunds. Jones, Sprague, Stewart, and
| Window. with the Democrats, voting against It,
PROPOSED LEGISLATION FOR THE DISTRICT.
! CONCLUSIONS OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE DISTRICT
| OF CoLUMBIA-PRoBABIIITY OF HAVING A DEL
FGATE TO coNGREss-THE ELECTION INTENDED
| TO vINpICATE Ex-G GOV. sHEPHERD-soME OF THE
JOBS IN TIE BILL
IBY TELEGRAPH TO THE TRIBUNE.1
| WAA,INGroN, Feb. 25.-The Committee on the
| District of Columbia had last Monday evening in
the House for their reports. and brought up their