The Portland daily press., 1876-11-13

for President and Vice-Presidant r.,,u
bill was referred to the Committee of Priv;Is1as
and Elections. 1t was reported back amen5eJ
and after much debate, passed the oath OF
March, 1873, by vote of 81 yeas to 26 nays.
1886, 1915 -0N0'
On the day of its passage Mr. Thurman,
WI VINO had voted for it, moved reconsideration,
anlS was debated at different times, but no
nnal acton was had on the bill, and it is now
pending in the Senate.
On the l4th of August, 1875, message was
announced to the Senate that the House had
passed resolution suspending the sixteenth
ana ae seventeenth Joint rules for the remainder
OF t2e session. The action of the House was
based upon the assumption that these aules.
tos9ther with the other joint rules of previous
SESSIONS were still in force. When this an
niouncement was made, Mr.. Hamlin said, that
We nave no sixteenth aud seventeenth Joint
rules to suspend" Subsequently. on the same
DAY, Mr.. E1munds, in response TO the resoIu-
'oh OF the House, offered the following.
Resotred, That the resolution of the House of Rem
resentatiyes presented this day in the followipo
Se Resolved by the House Of Representatives
ltne senate concurrng That the Sixteenth and Sew
enteenth Joint Rules be Suspended for the reIna;n
qer Oh t1e session. be respectfully returned to the
house Oh Representatives, with the statement that
as he House OF Representatives had NOT notitied
the senate OF the adoption of Joint rules for this
present session. as proposed by the resolution OF the
senate Oh the 10th day of January last and trans
mitted to the House of Representatives on the 29d
Gay Oh the month, there joint rules in force"
Aud this was unanimously adopted.
u, 1t seems that the House took no action upon
tne resolution OF the Senate renewing the joint
rules except the twenty second joint rule,
Which regulates the manner of counting the
electoral vote, nor did the House take action on
the resolution just quoted, but assumed that
the old joint rules were in force, while the
senate early held that the joint rules continued
only during the concurrence of the two Houses
ana That no 1OlDt rull9 in foraa
=, upon the main question whether either
House can recede from joint rule adopted by
a previous Congress l have no doubt. Each
house has the Constitutional power to adopt
It's own rules of procedure. No authority can
limit thls power except by change of the Con-
stltutlon. The rules of one House do not bind
It's successor, unless acquiesced in or adopted
Dy IT, While, therefore, am clear that the
Senate had the power and did recede from the
twenty second Joint rule, yet it is a matter of
grave regret and solicitude that some mode of
settling disputed vote in the Electoral College
mas not been provided for, for it is easy to con-
celve a contingency when such a dispute
would involve US in civil war. We can only
hope that the good fortune that has attended
us thus far will continue; that the very gravity
OF the danger will compel all parties fairly and
honestly to submit to the will of the majority
expressed in Constitutional forms, and that the
counting of the vote by the Vice President, in
the presence of both Houses, will be so Impair
TALLY done as to command respect and aequi-
escence. 1t is danger that should be guarded
against by Constitutional amendment.
JOHN SHERMAN.