Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1880-03-25
The House.

Speaker declared the first business in order was
the question whether the proposition submitted
yesterday by MIR. McLane, providing that the
bill introduced by Mr.. Townshend, of Illinois,
Monday last and referred to the committee ON
revision of the laws. shall be taken from that
committee and referred to the committee on
ways and'means, presented question of priv
ilege.
Mr.. Blackburn raised the point that under
the clause of rule defining the duties of the
Speaker the journal of yesterday would have to
be examined and approved before the unfinished
business relating to Mondays journal would
come before the House.
The Speaker replied the journal of Monday
had not been disposed of, and it would be in
consistent to take up yesterdays journal be-
fore Monday for consideration.
,Mr. Blackburn argued it was not demanded
by the rules that the House should approve the
journal, but it was imperative that the journal
of one day should be read at the desk immedi-
ately after assembling of the House on the fol
lowing day.
Mr. Reed contended Tuesdays journal could
not be read until Mondays journal had been
approved.
MIR. Garfield quoted in support of Reeds
position section of the constitution, which
provides that each house shall keep a journal,
not that the clerks shall keep it.
MIR. Blackburn quoted from Cushing 8 man
ual in support of his position.
After short and confused debate upon
Blackburn point of order, participated in by
Blackburn, Hutchins, Reed, F. Wood and
Newberry, the speaker stated it was com petent
for and obligatory upon the House to approve
it's journal. The chair would, however, sub
NIT the question to the House whether the
journal of yesterday must be read before the
journal of Monday must be approved.
The Speaker was about to submit the ques-
ton to the House when Mr.. Springer raised
the point of order that under the rules it was
the duty of the chair to decide the point of Or
der subject to appeal by the House.
The Speaker replied he desired the cons;ruc-
ton of the House on the point of order, and
submitted to the House the question as to
whether yesterdays journals should not be
read. The vote resulted yeas 1l5, nays l29, a
party vote with the exception of Messrs Bick-
nell, of Indiana, Bouck, of Wisconsin. Morse,
Phelps, Covert, Il. Wood, Ross, Smith, of New
Jersey ,Beltzhoover, Bachman, Clymer, CoffrOth,
Wise and Wright, who voted with the Repub-
icans in the negative.
On the announcement of the result Mr..
Knott raised the point that reading of the jour-
nal being required by the rules of the House,
could not be dispensed with without unani-
nous consent.
The Speaker replied the House by majority
vote had put its Interpretation on the rule and
Ia ODeQlence To the VOlC6 OIL tne house ne SnOulu
override the point of order.
Amid great deal of confusion and noise the
Speaker was piled with points of order by
Messrs. Bland, Hutchins. Blackburn and others,
all of which points he overruled, and directed
the clerk to read Mr.. McLane's proposition.
Much amusement was oceasioned by the violent
gesticulations of Mr.. T. Turner, Kentucky,
who at this point rose and moved to adjourn,
and that being defeated moved to take a recess
till o'clock. This motion having also been
defeated Mr.. McLanes proposition was read as
follows:
WHEREAS, The House being of opinion in
reference of House bills 50 to IS, to the COM
mittee on revision of the laws was incorrect
under the rules; be it
Resoloed, That said committee be discharged
from its further consideration, and that the
same be referred to the committee of ways and
means.
The Speaker again announced the pending
question was whether that proposition pre-
scented question of privilege.
Mr.. McLane explained his proposition. He
took exception to the journal of Monday. 1t
had been approved by the Speaker and read to
the House, but had not been approved by the
House, and before it was approved he submit
ted as question of privilege that it was his
right to have bills referred according to the
rules.
Mr.. Robson argued that it was a right of
the House, as House, to see that the rules
were properly lived up to. That was point
which concerned the House collectively. Under
the rules it was left to the House, at least to
the judgment of members, that the pro. forma
proceedings should be correct.
Mr.. Townshend rose to interrupt Mr.. Robe
son. insinuste nothing against the gentle
man. He did nothing that was liable to GEN.
sure as dishonorable thing. I think he had
a mistaken idea of the effect of the rules. and
used an indistinct rule to accomplish purpose
which the House did not mean should be &C.
complished.
Mr. Springer contended that the bill having
been referred to the committee on revision of
the laws it couldnot be taken away from that
committee and referred to any other without
suspension of the rules-any other movement
would be revolutionary and would tend to de-
stroy the harmony of the rules.
Mr.. Oscar Turner appealed to the ma jority TO
let the whole question drop and proceed to con-
slider appropriation bills. If the bill we're re-
ported back by the committee on revision of
the laws the majority of the House could then
refer it to whatever committee it pleased.
Mr.. Mills said that in his seven Year, OF Con-
gressional life he had never seen such an up
heaval of the waters about the reference of a
bill as had taken place yesterday and to-day:
1t was not question as to the prerogatiye OF
the com mittees on revision of the laws and
ways and means. There was something that
laid deeper than that. What was it? There
were two committees, one SO organized that il
would not report back a bill to reduce taxation
on the people, the other 30 constituted that il