Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1878-04-16

|
thereof in district court shall be fined not
exceeding $50, or imprisoned not exceedinp
thirty days, at the discretion of the court.
| At the,end of the reading of the resolution
Mr.. Garfield raised the question of considers
ton. BE objected to its reception now. This
was . matter settled by authority of CONGRESS-.
The majority of the House could refuse to re-
! ceive it.
| The Speaker There is no consideration asked
for It.
Mr.. Gar6eld-It is to be referred to a COM
mlttee for consideration.
The Speaker-Under the rules of the Houae
| it Is not allowed for consideration.
Mr.. Garfeld-It is my only method of OBJ
| jecting to consideration of the paper at this
stage. If it were brought into the House and
offered for action, we could raise the question
of consideration. Now it is put in train for
action, and my only way of raising the qnes-
ton of consideration is to object to It's reference
| Mr. Cox, of New York, read rule 100 of the
House, which provides that bills introduced
during the morning hour bes referred without
debate.
Mr.. Garfield said the House was always the
controller of it's own business. For instance.
| If bill were introduced to subvert the govern
ment, the House could refuse to refer, That
right the House had never gi7en way.
Mr.. Stephens-1n such caae as that, when
any bill is introduced into the House, the aues-
ton of reception may be raised by ANYBODY,
but may be repealed on its first reading. That
takes precedence of the question of reference.
The Speaker-Will the gentssm direct the
attention of the chair to any such rule.
NJ. Stephens speak Of parliamentary law.
In this case, however, wish to say to the gen
| tleman from Ohio, Garfield, that I trust he
| will withdraw all objections to this measure
| 1t comes from one of the States of this Union.
Let it go. Let it be referred. DO not raise a
! question of this sort on this preliminary mo-
ton. I trust the gentleman will withdraw it,
and let this resolution be referred to the iu-
dietary committee
can be made. The States have some rights yet
left. When they present resolutions we are
bound to receive them. The right of petition
on the part Of the people and States, is equal,
and cannot b abrogated. The gentleman from
Georgia, Stephens, speaks Of some parlia-
po se''fy to rule ree ey which am we .w san
Of the rule to which he refers but in this ne
culiar morning hour the Speaker has no alter
| native except to submit the question Of refer
ence.
| Mr. Haskell, Kansas desire to know if it
! is not competent for the House to decide to
what committee any bill may be referred.
The Speaker-lt is, and that is as far as the
House has ever gone.
Mr. Has.ell-If that is so is it not competent
for the House to decide that it shall not refer it
at all.
The Speaker-That would be an Infringement
of the individual rights of member in his
! capacity of representative. :,
| Mr.. Oliver-The first reading Of the bill is
for information, and if opposition be made
| the bill may be rejected.
The Speaker-This is not bill. it is q COM
munication from q State Legislature
Mr.. Oliver-Would not the same rule apply
| The Speaker-Thc chair thinks that rule
made to apply to bills is not com prehensive
enough to embrace communications from q
| State Legislature. Those arc introduced in the
nature of memorials.
Mr.. O.iver-The gentleman from New York
| Cox takes the position that the question of
| rejection cannot be entertained in regard to
any bill.
Mr.. Cox-In the last Congress a motion was
made ny the gentleman from Indiana, to re-
| ject certain bill with reference to the cur
rency but the Speaker decided that it could
| not be made during the morning hour.
/! The Speaker-The chair thinks that this is
not analogous to bill at all. This is a COM
munication from State legislature embraced
within the right Of petition.
hlr. Springer desired to read section six
of the bill incorporating the electoral COM
| mission.
Mr.. Regain object to debate.
The Speaker-The chair thinks that this in
the nature of point of order, and thinks the
| subject too important o one to refuse to listen
to point of order.
Mr. Springer then read section six of the
electoral commission bill, which provides that
nothing in the act shall be held to impair OF
affect the right of any person to test the title
of the person declared elected if any such right
exists.
Mr.. Garfield demand a vote on the ques-
ton of reference and call for the yeas and nays
Mr.. Thompson-lf it is in order, move this
memorial and all accompanying papers be re-
ferred TO special committee Of fifteen mem
beers, to be appointed by the speaker: I make
that motion for the reason that il
appointing that committee, / have full
confidence that the speaker of this House viii
faithfully perform his delicate and important
duty, and that the committee so constructed
will have the confidence Of this House, ant
will command the respect of the whole coun
try.
Mr.. O'Neill-I hope my esteemed colleague
Thompson, will withdraw hls motion to refe
this communication to a select committee O
fifteen, as such committee gives importanc
to q subject which, in my opinion, is insultin,
to the House, and is designed to create unres
in the country upon the settled question Of tn
) Presidential title.
Mr.. Oliver argued that the resolution wa
neither a petition nor memorial. 1t aske
nothing Of Congress. It was simply a notifca
ton that the Maryland Legislature had con
sidered the subject.
MIR. Springer hoped the gentleman fror
: Iowa would not dictate to the Legislatures Q
, States what kind of petition they should sen
, to Congress. 1t was the province of States t