The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1876-12-13

ripnt To adopt It's own rules, and that that right
could not be- superseded.
confirmed IN q remark iule manner his pres MT
Judgment. inasmuch ~ In that di-cussi"n the
whole Oisrussion mad reference ONLY to the
House rnhes proper. implying that the joint rules
were 10 he reached IN some other way than ny
the stumble action ~ the House.
Mr. g .theid argued that no rules, either JOINT
or sever /, can hind tho House. except bN its
cunscnf. ana hat the ptoposi'ton That joint
fuie coming from a former Congress had any
more authority IN the Frtv-iourth Congress
thiua House rule had VS.. II not absurd, en-
tifely unt"nnble.
! he Spcaker-Has not the gentleman himself
frequently, IN fptmer Congresses moved to su--
pend the -ixte nth ana seventeenth JOINT rules,
wituo those rules having been formally
atloptsd by thnt tongrossY
Mr.. Gafneid-CertaInl, | admit that freely,
AMI for the reason that whenever the two
II uses " Congress proceed without challenge
To act under rud there Is an Implied assent to
those Iue-' Hhd tntN re faculty Hdoptel nut
the ASSUMPTION OF tho Speakers ruling to-di
~ at the House can bind the Senate to be- gov
ern"d bv rules u whcn u does NOT consent. anu
OF course, vice versa. In that way. all Congress
es ia lat ten wears ago cDnid Uind all later
congresses forever, unless one BODY en- Sc % re-
lease the other from the old obligs ION OF dead
Congress, thus absolutely nulitfvIng the Consi-
tutionat privileges and Urprogatives Of the
House. aud also II the Senate. sun. do not
wish, N an Incidental. or Informal point, To
OFT tl.ne for consideration. EvervoOdy can see
that there can be avery great pubiic question
tht Will turn upon the twenty. second JOINT
that discussion, we shall come to IL on a direct
issue, with full debate. therefore WITHDRAW
the appeal
MIR Springer, Dem, ny asked Mr. Garfield
whether the Joint rules were IN existence ~ the
close OF The FOrty-tnird CONGRESS.
Mr. Garfield declined TO answer until after he
should have examined the question.
The Spe iker-rhe Char does not wish bv any
statement Of his TO anticipate tn Il question,
except as herein connected with u matter Of
fact. he House, composed OF the same gen
Isl. Ilpt
rules were IN existence. by adopting un ,ninious-
" a resolution TO suspend the joint rules num-
ners sixteen and seventeen.
MIR. SJringer-ihss JOINT rules have never
been re idopted ty any subsequent Congress
present tine. The twcniy-second JOINT rule WIS
acted under In the counting he votes II the
Presidenti u electors In 1863 aud also In 1873, and
yet It was never adopted nut Once-in 1915.
Mr.. Iloar Otcp., MassD askcd the speaker
whether rule of action wnich rad been nan ed
down by tact consent from Congress to Con-
gress, ~ u the mole II proceeding OF the TWO
Houses. " 5 no' necessarily abrOg tied by mes
sage from one OF them to the Otner mat II COM
siderei these joint rules no lDuger Ia force.
OtueIw s.. would NOT tne House he bound. not
merely uy TIE act Of previous House. ss in the
case 81 It's own rules, but by tho act OF "A pre-
vinus senator
ine speaNer said that the history OF the two
Houses > 90 the lint rules showed that when
any propuslupn ~ one House to amend them
failed In th- other House, the rule continued
to be recognized, a cepted, aud c.ed under as
il thsy were IA fun force.
Mr.. Spriuger-lne Joint rules were adopted In
the form II concurrent resolution. and con-
current RESI- lutiOn cannot be- repeated by one
body without tie . 1nsent OF the Otner.
Mt. Ho Does the gentleman say that rule
adopted nv "A lDcurlent resolution at the be-
ginning Of tie Government binds successive
Houses forever. uutil the senate abani Ions ~
Mr. : rrturer--l util botl House. Az md an IL
| certainly. he gentleman from Mlssacnu-
sci himself, when the Presidential votes Of
1873 were neinc connteu. objected 10 votes being
- Tor lIoraC. Greeley, because he was dead.
and his objection was b1seu on the twenty
second JOINT rule. which never had been re-
adop ell since IT. ldoption In 1855
Mr.. Holr-Bcth Houses were acting under It
Mr.. sprinser-It never had been reldoptcd,
and al no validity at all except that given to II
W.. Hoskns dlep. y. YJ-n the gentleman
from Illinois hol1s that these j)int rules cannot
he ahrOE.t It'd except bv consent Of the two
| Houses, | would ike to inquire uy what lAW OF
authority (after the senate nai repealed and re.
| tus 4 10 recognize thsm) the House or any other
| BODY g. n enforce them.
| Mr. Sprtnger-we cannot compel the Senate Ia
/ abide ~ It's own rule--that BODY - law untl
| ITSELF; out Ne can on our part abide by thos
rules. nd we choose 10 do II. lApplilse on the
N Mr acCrary ssiii that Speaker Kerr decided at
the beginning q last session that each House
to make the rules which govern its rroceediugs
auO. therefore. the rules which mad been
| adopt iu tae Nip-ihfl C!nefe' were not IN
! Or 80 tie neeinning on the Forty fourth. In &
| decision covered the whole ground In this con-
! to,er-s. uhic-i the gent would say thar d
! in l.ie - ~ o r.ie n tue government OF eus
/ House 4 Renrr-cntatiys
r'e ~peaNer-i q c- MT follow thar o..
House is nos .vcrnei hoy the joint rules
! espr. .a'h wncn Gao House ~ reminded # th,
/ -t fh tfttf"n Noii's,t ~ tar t5 tIe tne it.'
/ second i.iut rule g. CONCERNED. na,- s.yei.
ftp,s .,sr,tei md ~ 30 tu 81, ,uuti he eiarf,r
/ vote. .ut. gay flr f44i- ts concerned. 10 I
not aw Dec ~ .ry reason way ina. rule -l0ni
noi executed once more. lApplad-e GA tn'
Use l.-.u.-ioi lor, cl,scl and under 10.
nuilg & me -psaket The uogss pro tseaed TO- Ia
UNI li-Lei business 4 the last ses,i n. ~ nc
We lh~ Ni. lifN ~ Nf lt. - anu ! Nl-~ 'It