Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1889-01-11
upon motion to adjourn to day certain, and

upon q motion to adjourn to a day certain, and
the point was sustained by the Speaker.
Mr.. Weaver then moved to take a recess
until 1:30, but he was again blocked by Mr..
Randall with point of order. He held that
the motion was in the nature Of business, and
therefore, not in order until after the journal
had been read.
The Speaker decided the point to be well
taken. The chair, he said, had decided a few
mornings ago that it was competent for the
gentleman to make O motion before the Jour-
nal was read. The House, however, could
transact no business until the journal had been
read.
MR.. WEAVER QUOTES PREVIOUS DECISION.
Mr.. Weaver contended that the chair had
ruled not only that a motion to adjourn was in
order, but also motion to adjourn to day
certain.
Mr.. Randall-The chair did not make that
ruling. The chair ruled upon different point
from that If the point of order had been made
as it was made to-day he would have ruled then
as now.
Mr.. warner-The point of order was made,
and the chair stated that the House might de-
sire to adjourn before the readiug of the jour-
nal, and might desire to adjourn to a day GER
tain.
THE SPEAKER EXPLAINS.
The Speaker would state to the gentleman
from Iowa that he had decided the other day
that motion to adjourn might be made before
the journal was read. The chair had over
looked for the moment the fact that the gen.
tleman had also pending a motion to adjourn
to day certain.
Mr.. Weaver-The chair put the motion and
the House consumed the whole day voting
upon it.
Mr.. Randall-There was no point of order
raised against it.
Mr.. Weaver-If the motion made was not in
order it was the duty of the Speaker to so hold.
THE SPEAKER MAINTAINED THE POSITION
he had taken this morning. Even had the
chair decided otherwise on a previous occa-
sion, he was now satisfied that motion to ad-
journ to day certain could not be made before
the Journal was read and he would have no
hesitation in reversing his own ruling. He
thereupon directed the clerk to read the
Journal.
Mr.. Weaver demanded the reading in extenso,
but fortunately the journal was short and its
reading consumed little time.
MR.. RANDALL MOVES AGAINST MR.. WEAVER AAaIN
But Is DEFEATED,
Mr.. Weaver was Immediately on his feet
with another motion for an adjournment until
Monday.
Mr.. Randall interjected a point of order
against it, which, however, was not sustained
by the chair.
But Mr.. Dibble Is. CO. came forward with a
conference report upon the Senate bin for the
erection of public building at Milwaukee,
Wis, which
NOTWITHSTANDING MR.. wEAvERs PROTEST,
the Speaker ruled was of higher privilege even
than motion to adjourn. As agreed to in
conference, the bill provides for the erection
of building at an ultimate cost of 81 200. 900,
and the report having been read, and the pre-
viOus question demanded by Mr.. Dibble, Mr..
Weaver moved to adjourn.
The Speaker decided that as the rules gave
a conference report precedence over a motion
to adjourn. subsequent motion to adjourn
could not deprive the report of such prece-
dence.
Mr. Weaver suggested that in that case the
House could not adjourn when a conference
report was before it even if the consideration
of that report occupied month.
The Speaker replied that it was always COM
petent for the House to postpone its considera-
fion.
MR.. REED AND THE SPEAKER.
Mr.. Reed-Does the chair hold that a motion
to postpone is in order, but that the House
cannot adjourn when there is a conference re-
port pending.
The Speaker-The chair hair has decided
that under the rules and the uniform practice
of the House a conference report may be pre-
sented even when motion to adjourn is pend
ing. II the chair is now to hold that a motion
to adjourn may be made before the motion is
put on the conference report, the rule amounts
to nothing.
Mr.. Reed-Suppose motion to postpone is
made and then a motion to adjourn is made;
would it be in order?
The Speaker-The chair will not decide
questions until they are presented, especially
on SO important matter as this.
POINT OF ''No QUORUM"
A standing vote on ordering the previous
question resulted $50 to 4, and Mr.. Weaver
raised the point of no quorum,