The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1883-02-27

had voted in the affirmative changed their votes.
Mr.. Tucker also changed his vote TO the affrma-
tive, for the purpose of moving reconsider alton.
These changes made the total as above stated.
Mr.. Reed moved to lay the motion TO recon-
slider on the table, and the yeas and nays were
ordered pending which Mr.. King moved to adj
jOurn. The motion to adjourn was lost-yeas Is,
nays l74-and the question required on tabling
the motion to reconsider by which the House
determined to consider the Reed rule. The mo
| ton was tabled-yeas 1876, nays l2l.
MT Reed demanded the previous question.
MR.. BLACKBURN RAISES POINT OF ORDER
Mr.. Blackburn raised point of order against
the resolution, and promised his argument with
the disclaimer of addressing his remarks in a
futile effort TO describe and fifty characterize
! the effort which the committee on rules had em-
bodied IN this resolution in order to esca pc
the strait into which the majority had
| been driven. That question would come
up II the majority saw fiji, and
| at ,hat time he would ask to be heard on the
merit (if merit there was) of the arbitrary prOpO-
sitlon The first paragraph of the proposition
had the effect of suspendnS the rules by bare
majority vote. 1t a proposition to take
away from the House the power of suspending
the rules by a two-thirds vote. 1t was propose ed
that majority vote should suspend the rules
for the purpose of taking up one bill and limit
ing action on that bill to one motion-a motion
to agree to the Senate amendments. 1t gave
power to ask a conference on a bill not one SEN
tence, one line or one syllable of which had ever
been in the House before. The majority was IN
willing to trust to count which, if common
rumor was to be credited bad been carefully
n
signed by the members. Though the rumOr
was that the majority had marshaled it's forces,
yet it dare not allow a vote to be taken on the
motion to concur in the Senate amendments.
He denied that the proposition could be consid-
cred, construed or denominated rule. Ii it
were adopted, what happened II went into the
manual as a standing rule, to become, in all
probability, functuO ofliclo within thirty min
utes after enactment. 1t was an absurdity on its
face. Was it a rule of the House of Representa-
tves, or did II not practically constitute gisla
ton Itself Could nyOne tell him the difference
between the proposition submitted and o mo-
ton made by any member of the House when he
asked unanimous consent to take up and pass
certain bl2 Or to make the analogy closer aud
almost identical, could anyone state the differ
ence between this proposition and that OF the
member of the committee, who, under authority
from that committee, moved to suspend the
rules ana pass the measure indicated by hml
This was simply an order from the committee
rules.
ing resolution, motion to non-concur might be
made. Suppose that one member OF the House
voted to nOn-cOncur and 200 voted against it,
did the gentleman mean to say that one could
override the 2002
Mr. Blackburn-I do mean to say just that,
| and nothing more nor less. mean to say that
when the motion to concur is made, if there
for p3 aud sos 'l" %smOora nn vote asal" "sS
simply because feature of this resolution
fused to allow the bill to be considered. 1t is
what Blackstone has denOmInated not rule,
not n law. but sentence pronounced, and that
without hearing. Continuing, he said that he
did not know he had authority, or even SEM
blauce of authority, to express an opinion as to
what might he the purpose of any mem
her OF the House, except himself; bnt sincerely
he declared he had no purpose of Offering any
obstruction or interposing any improper diff
Guilty In the pathway of the House, If he meant
to make an effort toward tax or tariff legisla-
ti0n. He did not want to make any threats,
for he had no purpose of putting them into
execution but he came TO ask that the House
Gf it TO be stripped of its constitutional pre-
negatives to originate tariff legislation should at
least have the privilege of Cuncurring in what
the Senate had originated II partisan prejudices
could he laid aside, he could not but believe that
the unbiased judgment of every intelligent man
would force him to the conclusion that this prop
ositiOn was makeshift to meet party exigences
and could be fairly incorporated into the sys-
TEN of rules of the House. If the proposition
were agreed to. the majority would have adopted
process of indirecton by a parliamentary twist
of the wrist, and would have reached the inside
of the limitations of law.
THE POINT OF ORDER ovERRULED.
The Sneaker said he had nothing to do at
present with the question of the constitutional
per0gatives of the House in the matter of orIgi-
mating a,tariff bill. That question did not enter
into the decision of the point of order made by
the gentleman from Kentucky (Blackburn.)
That gentleman rested his point solely on a
claim that this resolution, If adopted, would not
be rule. 1t would be rather early for the
chair to decide what 1t was. 1t was reported
a rule, and was before the House. But passing
that, it was perfectly competent for the House,
when n subject was properly brought before il,
to change every rule and all rules which had
been adopted. Early IN the session resolution
had been adopted authorizing the committee
rules to report at any time any change of rules
or new rules; that the right OF the committee
had heen exercised perhaps in this CASE and
this rule had been proposed as a substitute for
the various propositions referred to in it. It's
effect, il the chair could look to that, might be
in this exceptional case to put aside other rules,
even that providing for suspension iof rules.
But the greater certainly included the lesser
rule might have been reported from the COM
mittee properly which would suspend or repeal
or Rnnul or set aside every rule of
the House, standing or special, and if the House
chose to affirm that report 1t would certainly be
competent for the House to do so in this case,
though the report might apply to but a single
great and important measure 1t seemed per-
fectly clear to the chair that 1t would be rHle
TO the extent to which 1t went, and perhaps the
gentleman from Kentucky (Mr Blackburn
might see that in this one special case it went
to the end. The chair overruled the point iot
order
Mr. Blackburn appealed, aud Mr. Reed moved
to lay the appeal on the table. On this the yeas
and nays were ordered
AS it now wanted but five minutes to the hour
for recess, that time consumed in a confused
and unsuccessful effort to ebviate a night ses-
sion. Recess.
pration bill nonconcurred in, and CON
ferees appointed. The House then proceeded,
peal taken from the decision of the Speaker
overriding the point of order raised by Mr.,
Blackburn against the Reed resolution. The APP
peal tabled-yeas 116, nays 90.
Mr. Reed demanded the previous question.
Mr.. Carlisle inquired whether Mr.. Reed would
permit an amendment to be offered which would
give The House an opportunity to vote to concur
or nonconeur in the Senate amendments to the
internal revenue bill. ,fi-
Mr. Reed-No sir
The'previous question was ordered-yeas 121,
nays 105.
Mr. Carlisle opposed the resolution in a brief
speech. In his opinion it was a mOnstrous prop
ositiOn. 1t seemed to him the friends of the
measure would at least accord to the gentlemen
who differed from them the poor privilege of
casting their votes according TO their honest con-
victions With that view he moved to rccommit
the resolution to the committee on rules, with
instructions to that committee that if it were
again reported to the House it should. he so
amended that the House might be permitted TO
vote, to concur non-concur in the Senate
amendments.
Mr.. Reed raised the point of order that there