The daily Cairo bulletin. (Cairo, Ill.) 1878-1???, 1883-06-15
A PROTEST..

|
ting the following protest against the man
ncr the so-caled Harper high license bill
was passed, for signatures, and all the
Democrats of the house, excepting the nine
who voted for the passage of the bill, are
signing the same. When all the signatures
are obtained it will be offered to be placed
upon the journals of the house:
We the undersigned members of the
house of representatives of the Thirty-third
general assembly of the state OF Illinois, 10
the exercise of our constitutional right, do
most respectfully, earnestly and emphatic
ally protest against the supposed passage
of house bill No. PSF, commonly called the
Harper bill, for the following reasons:
| First--Said bill is not the bill as origin.
ally introduced in this house. None Of 1t
remains except the number of the bill and
the enacting words, all else has been taken
out aud new matter substituted
Second Said bill in its present form is
new bill and has not been read three times
upon three separate days as required by TIE
| constitution.
Thrd-Because this bill has been altered
and changed and the journal the duly au-
thorzed record of this house, has been al.
tered and mutilated without the knowledge
of the house, as will fully appear by reference
to the evidence taken by a special commit
tee of this house, which original evidence is
filed herewith, marked exhibit "a" and
made part of this protest
Fourth The claim set up by the friends
of said bill that the word resulting" strick
en- out of the bill aud the word ARISING
inserted are to the same effect and therefore
1t was a clerical error, which the clerk had
a right to correct without authority from
this house, can not be maintained. We ask
by what authority the clerk Of the house
becomes the judge as to whether the author
of bill or an amendment has used the
proper language in the construction of his
bill or an amendment Such a constluc.
ton makes the clerk of this house the critic
of all bills and the approver of its journals.
Notwithstanding this wonderful authority |
of the clerk of this house, which seems now |
to be conceded by the majority of the |
house, we respectfully submit and maintain |
that this house when duly convened is the |
only authority that can criticise a bill or an
amendment, or approve or authorize the |
alteration of or change any word in the
body of any bill, or upon the face Of the
journal, and III this case if the words "aris-
ing" and resulting" are the same the
word resulting" should have been left in
the bill and and the journal, so that the
courts might determine the question as to
whether the words in the sense and place
used were the same. The very fact that the
one word was substituted for the other
must be conclusive to the mind Of any ra.
tional m an that the author of the change
ucclHCu IL uldleTldl.
And we do further protest against the
supposed passage Of the following resolu-
ton, and the ruling of the speaker thereon,
for the following reason;
Resolved that the several house and SEN
ate appropriation and road and drainage
bills, and all bills on the subject of license,
Oh oil h., a.. al nd |
tnue from day to day until disposed Of.
F,rst-This resolution amounts to, and Is
nothing more nor less than, a suspension Of
rule IA of this house "a change in the or.
der Of business which can only be made by
or upon two-thirds vote Of this house.
Second-The speaker erred in everything
the point Of order made by Mr.. Linegar of
Alexander, that it required two-third vote
to carry the resolution.
Third-The speaker enormously held
that majority Of a quorum Of this house
could pass the resolution.
Fourth-The ruling of the speaker is in
the very teeth of rule No. 81, adopted by
this house under the power conferred upon
il under the constitution.
Fifth-The ruling Of the speaker is in
violation of the plainest principles OF par
lamentary law, and the rules laid down IN
Cushings Unabridged Manual Of Parlia-
mentary Law, as indicated in sections ,478,
! ,479, 1880, ,4sl and 1882, which are in
force by virtue Of the rules of this house.
We further assert and protest that said
bill was never properly placed upon its pas
sage for the reason that the house was upon /
the order of second reading under rule IA
of the house, and that the above resolution
was not legally adopted and had no force, {
as will fully appear from the journals OF
this house.
We therefore protest that the aforesaid
bill has not been passed in accordance
with the constitution and lawfully adopted
rules of this house, and that all action
had thereon 10 null and void