Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1880-01-23
CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE.
XIII. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS DAY.

XIII SESSION EIGHTEENTH DAY.
Phonographically Reported for the RECORD USIoa
by Willis Stockholm
n SENATE.
SACRAMENTO, January %, 1880.
The Senate met at 10 A. M, pursuant to adjourn
ment, Pres dert Mansfield in the chair.
Roll called and quorum present.
journal OF yesterday approved.
Leave OF absence was granted Senator Kane on
account Of sickness.
The CHAIR announced the appointment of Joseph
johnson and Hank Jones as Rear Porters.
REPORTS
Mr.. NfE, from the Committee on Judiciary, re-
ported back Senate Bill No. 81, and recommended
its passage with the following amendment: "Amend
title SO as to read as follows: All Act to amend
Section sos of the Penal Code, declaring who are
magistrates insert in lieu OF said, i'll Section l,
the words the penal" Also, report back Senate
Bill No SO. and recommend its passage with the
following amendment Amend title so as to read,
An Act to repeal Sections 1923, 1885, 1ll2 ana 1l43
of the Penal Code, in relation to criminal cases.
Also, reported back with amendments, recommend
ing their passage amended, Senate Bills. Nos 33
35, 81, 90, %, "a and %.
TIIE TEST CASE.
Mr.. DICKINSON moved that Senators Sears and Sat-
terwhite be added to the committee. appointed to
present to the Supreme Court the case under Senate
Bill No. So. He stated that the committee, as it
stood, represented only side, and it desra-
BILE that both be represented.
The motion prevailed.
INTRODUCTION OF BILLS.
Mr.. ESDs-I present to the Senate bill at the re-
quest of the Real Estate and Taxpayers Association
OF the city and county of San Francisco. 1t is u
small article and worthy Of attention. THE bill,
which provides for the city government of San Fran
CISCO sent to the desk. 1t was in six sections,
covering 25S pages OF legal cap paper.l
Mr.. JouNsoN-l suggest that the bill, simply to
save time. be considered as read, and let it be
printed 1t will 20 upon the journal having been
read.
Mr.. ENos-I do not think that bill comes under
the urgent necessity provision.
Mr.. SATTERwHIrE-I move to amend by adding
the San Francisco delegation to the staff OF the
Secretary to assist in reading the bill.
Mr.. CoNGEv-I move that the first reading of the
bill be dispensed with, on the ground of urgent
necessity. | think that any person who looks at
that bill once will think it of urgent neces-
sity.
Mr.. NEUMANS-I move to amend that it be read
by title.
Mr. JoHSsoN-On second thought, | Withdraw my
suggestions, and call for the reading of the bill.
Mr.. SATTERwHITg said there was motion before
the Senate. He hoped the rules would be enforced,
and no Senator be allowed to make motion or dis
it until recognized by the President and the
question stated.
FROM TIE ASSEMBLY.
message was received from the Assembly, an.
nounclng the adoption by the Assembly of Concur
rent Resolution No 11-relative to the establish
ment Of dead-letter office at San Francisco and
that the Assembly had concurred in Senate Concur
rent Resolution No. 12-relative to the appointment
of q committee to present q case to the Supreme
Court.
THE BILL READING.
Mr. CONCERT renew the motion that we dispense
with the first reading OF the bill, on the ground OF
urgent necessity and that the bill be read by title.
do not think we have time allotted to us by the
Constitution to read great many OF that kind OF
bills three times at length and think that all of
the honorable Senator'S will see the necessity of sus
pending the provisions Of the Constitution bills
of that length.
Mr. BAKER-I was one of those who voted against
the rule OF the Senate for the reading of bills three
times at length, and the fix that the Senate now
fnos itself in is the result of the rule adopted by
majority OF the Senate. But, we have that rule,
we bound to follow it through all its legitimate
consequences. | do not understand that a case Of
urgency is case OF convenience, and to my mind
there is nothing but the convenience of the Senate
which at this time lends any support to this motion
There is no danger that the city of San Francisco
will away. | would gladly dispense with the
reading OF these and all bills the first time, because
l do not believe that that was the construction and
practice intended to be followed out by this Const
tuition. But, inasmuch the Senate has voted to
read the ee bills the first time at LENGTH shall OPP
pose dispensing with it until we have changed the
rule III regard TO all bills, and shall vote against the
suspending of the rules in regard to any bill,
whether it be long or sholt, unless there be some
imperative, urgent necessity, which to my mind is
not this case. shall vote against SUSPENSION OF
the rules
Mr. CoSsEE-I did vote in favor OF putting that
construction upon the Constitution, but 1 also
stated ut the same time the same proposition which
| advance now-that in certain cases We could sus-
pend the rule and the Constitution AMI consider it
TO be Of urgency, on account OF the brief
time allotted II make all the laws OF the State TO
conform to the new Constitution, and do consider
now that this case is one Of urgent necessity, and
would come u der proper construction OF the Con-
stitution
Mr.. NEuMAXS-I move that the bill be laid on the
table and made the special order for February lst.
Mr. CONCERT accept the ameDdment.
Mr.. ENos-l think that this bill is entitled to be
treated with the same courtesy that al bills are
treated.
Mr.. NEUNASN-I propose to have some business
done here Before that time think We will have
construction by the supreme Court, and it will ia
cilitate business.
Mr.. SATrERwnrrE understand it takes two
thirds vote to adopt the motion of the Senator in
front of me (iIr Neumann). Rule says every bill,
when introduced, shall be read, etc
Mr.. L.MPsoS-If the senator from the Thirteenth
would withdraw the bill for few days until we get
the decision OF the Supreme Court it seems to it
would save at least two long days and great Gea Of
expense to the State. Ii it does not interfere with
the Senator'S wishes, it would save the Senate
great deal OF time.
Mr. ENos The gentlemen who came up from San
Francisco with the bill anxious that it should
be presented. We want to get that bill printed
SO that it be the subject of criticism ard discus
sion. That is the only copy in manuscript that we
have of the bill. | do not care whether it is read
No or npt ! me NJ ed
for in our committees and be subject to disc rs
sion, and take it up section by section The only
reason why thee is any urgent necessity for the
taking up OF this bill is that one portion of our city
government, known the street department, is at
perfect standstill, and the provisions is this bill
will put that department into operation if it is
passed.
The PRESIDENT suggested that the lst of February
comes Sunday.
Mr. NEUMANN amended his motion by making it
February 3D.
The President put the question: Shall the bill
be printed and made the special order for February
ID?
The Chair being in doubt, the ayes and noes We're
demanded by MIR. JOHNsoS.
Mr. SATTERwnTTg- was one OF those who believed
that the Constitution intended we should be com
PEELED to read bill at length only once Now do
not want to get up and glorify myself on the diti-
Guilty found by the Senate in taking the opposite
course. | want to accommodate myself to the busi-
ness Of the Senate, and as we are in this difficulty
hope the Senate will adopt the motion of the Senator
from the Tenth.
Mr.. WEST agreed with the views of the Senator
from the First Mr.. Sltserwhite. He hoped the
tiot would prevail He had two three bills that
were voluminous, an had heard Of others. The
reading of them would impose large amount Of
labor, and great expense to print these bills. All
these bills should first go the committees, and let
the committees examine them and report subst-
tutes embracing the good points of all. He had in
tended to ask the privilege OF introducing bill
and asking that the rule be suspended and the bill
referred to the committee without reading. He be-
eved that could be done and carry out the rule of
the Senate BY two-thrd vote. That will save the
printing OF many superfiuous bills, where several
were introduced on the same subject.
Mr.. JOHNSON opposed the motion because it was
to lay the bill upon the table He knew nothing of
the bill except that he believed it that had
been drawn by John +. Swift and printed in San
Francisco. He had read it, and he believed it
tanned some excellent provisions Notwithstanding
he not resident OF San Francisco, and did not
have the honor of being OF that delegation he did
not want to sec a bill killed in this manner. II
they desired to kill the bill let it be done openly
To lay the bill upon the table would put it in the
taken up again.
Mr.. WEST said that would not be the case il it
was made special order.
Mr.. JOHNSON held that both could not be included
in the same motion. The Constitution did not
permit them to dispense with the reading of bills at
length, il the Senate held that the proper con-