Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1890-01-30


| those Democrats who were present and not
voting.
Before the announcement of the vote
| Mr.. Rogers of Arkansas. who had mad
vertently voted in the Affirmative, decided
| to Withdraw his vote. but he was met with
| a storm of objections from the Repuollcan
side.
Mr.. Rogers endeavored 20 secure ruling
from the Speaker on the question in order
| that he might enter an appeal, but the
| Speaker declined to rule.
Mr.. Covert. of New York, changed his
vote from the negative TO the Affirmative.
Mr.. Rogers was then given permission to
| withdraw his vote, as was also slr. Cowles.
The vote was then announced as stand
| ing-yeas, 1G1 nays.2.
Mr.. Crisp raised the point of no quorum.
Tho Speaker: The Chair directs the
Clerk TO record the following names OF the
| members present and refusing TO vote.
| This statement was the signal for
burst of applause from the Republicans
and Of jeers from the Democrats
| The Clerk then proceeded to name the
! Democrats whom the Speaker had lotted
| down "a being present and not voting.
When the name Of Mr.. Breckenridge. OF
| Kentucky, was called he stepped into. the
| aisle and in n resounding voice said: L
deny the power of the Speaker TO do this
| and denounce it as revolutionary.
Cheer after cheer characterized by the
Republicans as "the rebel yell y went up
| from the Democratic side. and it was seve-
raj minutes before sufficient order was re-
| stored to enable the Clerk to continue the
reading OF the list of names. But order
| was only comparative. for while the Clerk
! was proceeding with the reading half q
| dozen Democrats were ON their feet de
| nouncing the action Of the Speaker.
MIR. Bland, of Missouri. roared ont that
| he was responsible for his action only to
| his constituents. and not to the Speaker,
and MIR. OFerrall, Of Virginia, protested
in the name of his State against this &c
| ton.
| Mr.. McCreary, of Kentucky. denied the
right of the Speaker to count him as
The Speaker: The Chair is making o
| statement of the fact that the gentleman
is present. Does the gentleman deny that
he is present? Applause and laughter on
| the Republican slde.l
| The name of Mr.. Outhwaite, of Ohio,
| having been called, that gentleman, amid
| been present when his name was called on
| the rOll-call. and that what the Speaker
was stating was not true. =.
| Mr. O'Ferrall inquired by what parlia-
| mentarv rule the Speaker had the right 70
| declare person present if he did not vote.
| The Speaker replied that he was now
making statement of the fact.
Mr.. Breckenridge. of Kentucky, declared
| that the action of the Speaker was disor-
| derly. and that the Speaker had no more
| right to make a statement from the chair
| than he would have were he on the floor.
| MIR. Crisp desired to appeal from the de-
| cision of the Chair. The Speaker replied
| that in due time he would allow the gen.
tleman every proper appeal to the House ia
an orderly fashion, as the Chair would
| demonstrate To the satisfaction OF the
| House.
Mr. Blount of Georgia: l understand
| the Chair TO direct the names to be put on
the roll by the Clerk.
The Speaker: TO be put on record by
| the Clerk.
Mr.. Cowles demanded recognition. He
was standing in the aisle i'll front OF the
| Speaker. :.
The Speaker declined to recognize him,
and said: VIII the gentleman have the
kindness to take his seat. # he does 50
| the Speaker will be greatly obliged.
For a moment Mr.. Cowles appeared to
hesitate whether or not he would resent
this invitation, but finally went quietly to
his seat.
| The Speaker proceeded to make n state
ment. The Clerk, he said, had announced
| of the members voting l61 yeas, NAYS.
| The Chair thereupon having seen the men,
bers present and having heard their names
| called in their presence. had directed re-
| cord to be made of this fact. Accordingly,
that question was now before the House,
| and the Chair proposed to give the state
| ment accompanied by the ruling, from
| which an appeal could be taken if any gen.
| tleman was dissatisfied Herewith.
Mr.. Crisp: In advance, enter an ap-
peal. ILaughterl.
The Speaker, continuing, said that for
| some considerable time question or TINS
| nature had been raised in very many par
, liamentary assemblages, and there had
| been a great doubt, especially in this body,
| on the subject. The Chair well recolected
| n proposition of this kind made by MIR.
| Randolph Tucker, of Virginia, an able con-
| stitutional lawyer, as well as an able men,
| Der of this House. The matter had been
| somewhat discussed. and the proposition
| was made with regard to putting 1t IN the
| rules. The general opinion when pre-
| vailed at that time. was that II was eNpe-
| dent to do so. Some men nave grave
| doubts whether it was proper TO make sucn
| an amendment TO the rules as would con-
! stitute persons present part of o quorum.
| The evils which had resulted from the
| other course had not been more apparent
| than now. and no such careful study had
| been then given to the subject as was gwen
at the present time. That had taken place
in 1880. Since then there had been various
arguments and various decisions by very
eminent gentleman on the suoJeci,
| and those decisions had very much
cleared up the question and rem
dered it much more apparent what
| the true rule was. One OF the nrst
places where the question had been raised
was the Senate OF the State OF New iork;
| The present Governor of New YORK had
| been the presiding officer, and upon MN
had devolved duty similar TO that wmc1 =
now devolved upon the Speaker. lie hao
met that duty in precisely the same man man,
ner. The question in New York had arisen
ON fhe constitutional necessity of having
three fifths of the members to constltute
a quorum for the passage OF q certain nli,
and the presiding officer had held that tiat
| constitutional provision as 70 the quorum
was entirely satisfied by the presence oil
the members. even il they did not vote.
Accordingly he had directed the recording
officer of the assembly rs part OF the re-
cord of the transaction to put down tIo
names of the members OF the Senato
who were present and refused a.. 70
vote in precisely the manner Tni men,. va
That decision could not be regarded as ID
any sense partisan, ut least as he cited II.
There had also been decision in the state
Of Tennessee where aprovision OF the Law law
reonired two thirds of the members to con,
stitnte a quorum. In the Legislature OF
lss5 a registration bill bad been pending
which was objected to by the Republican
members of the House. On the third read
ing the Republicans had refused to vote,
whereupon the Speaker, member OF tne
other party, had directed the clerk &c
connt az present those not voting and de.
clared the bill as passed on that reading
Those two decisions, the first made IN. iS ~
the other in 1885, seemed to the, present oe
cupant of the chair to cover the ground,
but there was an entirely familiar familiar
process which every old member ,,iaie,
of the Chair is incontestible evidence o.
the recognition at all times OF members
present as constituting part OF 9 Quorum
| II had been almost an. eyery-day occur
renee at certain stages. OF the session fol
votes TO be announced by the Chair con
taininr obviously and emphaticaily nt
quorum. Yet, If the point was not made I,
the hill vax always declared passed, ant