The New York herald., 1876-12-13
uousr or REPRESENTATIVES,.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
Mr. BLAIR, trcp) OF N. H., introduced a constitu-
tonal amendment orbiddng tho man acture and sale
of distilled liquors a beverage after tho year 1900
Referred
JOINT RULES.
Mr. BLAND, dem OF NO.. demanded tho resumption
OF business under the twenty first joint rule, which
qures that at second session Of Congress the unan
ishcd businessof the preceding session shall be taken
up in regular order.
The SPEAKER caused the rule to be read and decided
that nasmuch that rule was imperative the unnn-
shed OF The last morning hour Of the last
sion must have preference.
Mr. BuRcnAEp, (rep OF ILL.,, suggested that, while
he had objection tho resumption OF the business
or the last morning hour of the last session, II should
be resumed under rule 1876 OF the House.
The SPEAKER remarked that both rules wcro 10 the
same effect, except that joint rule No. 81 was i'm
pcratve, using the word "shalL"
Mr. GARFIELD, (rep) OF OHIO, said he had no objec-
tion tho ruling OF the Cnar ud r the 136th ue Of
the House. But that ruling implied mat the twenty
first joint rule was in existence aud binding on the
House he should respectfully appeal from that decision
The srEAKER--The Chair SO decides.
Mr.. BuRcHARo--ft is unnecessary 10 appeal from the
decision OF The Char Tar the 135th rule Is
cerned.
Mr. GARrIELD-I do not take that appeal
Mr.. BuRcHARp-The question does noi arise whether
tie Speaker decides that question (f IL should arsc)
the gentlemen on this side OF tho House desire to be
heard on It.
Mr.. GARFIELD said no agreed perfectly with the
ruling o. the Chair under the 136h rnle but he
wanted 10 call the attention OF the Chair to the fact
that the very joint rule which had been referred TO,
ana which was printed in the House volume Of rules
digest, not printed as rule OF the present
Congress. Bu, the joint rules headed "Joint
and orders OF the houses they existed at
tho close OF The Forty-third Congress. -
The SPEAKER-Arhat WAS put there without the
fbprtfy yufn "a n ad u n ~
Mr. GARFIELD continued TO quote from the digest to
the elect that the omission explained by the rsso
luton OF the Senate OF the 22d OF January, 1876 tsc-
ting out III FUN That resolution asked the concur
renee OF the House. and had been referred TO Tho
Committee on Rules, but had never been acted on.
This question had ARISEN ast week IN the Senate
ana IL was Then determined with but four dissenting
voicsl that there no JOINT rules IN force.
Mr.. McCEAgy, trcp) OF Iowa, sent to the Clerks
desk ana had rca! extract from the House proceed
ngs of thc last to show that question which
then MIR Speaker Kerr rul, that the constitution
each House the right 10 adopt It's own rules, and
that that right could hot be superseded.
The SPEAKER remarked that the extract just read
confirmed IN remarkable manner his present judg
mcnt nasmuch as Ia that discussion I'll, 'olnl''
hot used. but that the whole discussion had
reference only to the House rules proper implying
that tbs Join, rules were 10 be reached IN some other
way than by the simple action oi the House
MIR. GAKFiELps AR6UMExT.
Mr. GARrIELp argued that no rules, either joint or
and that the proposition that ieint ru'c coming from
former Congress had any more authority IN the
I a
not absurd entirely untcnable
The SPEAkER-Has Dot tho gentlemen himself
frequently ~ former Congresses moved TO suspend tho
sixtccDta and seventeen JOINT rules without those
ruics having been formally adopted by that Con-
grcssY
Mr.. GARFIELD Certainly; l admit that freely, and
Tor tho that whenever tho two houses OF Cor
eress proceed without challenge TO act under ru!cs
there implied rules and lhcy
tacltly adopted But Tie assumption OF :nc Spcaser's
ruling that the House hud the To
be governed by rules 10 which docs not consent and
of ult NAV "A C,lu prpSS ts.t
years ago could bind all later Congresses for
ever, unless body chose to release the other
the old iigalion OF dead Congress, thus ab-
solaiciy nulliyug the constitutional privileges ard
prcropalivcs ui House and also Of the Senate We
adopted the JOINT rules Tor the Forty iourn
Congress; w havc never concurrcd with the Scratc
rules VII ch II proposed TO adopt; The last and
present pr,siung officer of the House, the presiding
occr of The Senate our Journal our body OF ruI,s IN
The torn v digest all concur In the admission that
there Joint rules oi the Forty ourth Congress.
There is no body OF rules printed IN our book which
Processes TO be the JOINT rules OF tho Forty fourth Con
gress st do not wish on an incidental Or informal
point to bring the House 10 vote on this question
without time Tor consideration. Everybody can see
that there be very great public question that VIII
turn upon twenty second joint ru.c. aud prefer
thai whenever we como 10 that discussion We shall
10 IL on direct issue, with tull debate. there
forc withdraw the appeal
Mr.. SPRINGER, tdcfp.) OF Ill, asked Mr.. Garfield
whether The JOINT rules we're in existence a. the close
OF the Forty-third Congress
Mr.. GARFIELD declined to answer until alter hi
should have examined the question.
| The SrKAKgR-The Chair does not wish by any
statement oil 10 question:, except hs
herein connected with matter oi fact The House,
| composed OF the same gentlemen who now SIT hero,
dd, al the end Of tho last session, recognize the fact
that the JOINT rules were existence by adopting
mously resolution TO suspend the joint rules
| Nos. 10 aud IL.
Mr. SrgxcER--Thcse Joint rules have never been re-
adopted by any subsequent Congress from the ounda-
| ton OF the government TO the present time The
twcntysccond joint rule in the count
tho votos OF the Presidential electors In 1862 and
also In 1885, and yet never adopted but once,
| 1856,
Mr. HoAR, trcp) OF Mass, asked the Speaker whether
rule OF action which had been handed down ny tacIt
consent IRON Congress TO Congress 10 tho mode OF
proceeding OF the houses necessarily alb
rogatcd by message from one OF them TO the other
that considered these joint rules longer force
Otherwise would the House be bound not merely
by the Of previous House, as In The casc o It's
own rules. but by the act OF previous Senate.
Nv. SPRixGER--lf the doctrine be maintained that
when a joint rule is established between the two
houses one of them abrogatc that ruc ~ us wi