Bismarck weekly tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, Dakota [N.D.]) 1884-1943, 1890-03-14
House.,
MONDAY, March lot

The house met at 2 p. NJ, pursuant to
adjournment.
All members being present except
Messrs. Allin, Buchanan, Greene, LANCER,
Pinknam, Thomas and Walton.
Mr.. Thompson of Cass moved that the
rules be suspended and that the house pro-
coed to the third reading of house bills.
Mr.. SPEAKER announced as the COM
mittee on conference on senate bill Al, the
railroad bill, Messrs. Stevens, Roney and
Unlisted.
Mr.. BOWEN asked why he wasn't &C.
corded the usual courtesies of legislative
bodies. He had made the motion for a con-
ference committee and couldn't under
stand why he wasn't named as a member
of the committee.
Mr.. SPEAKER said the matter was an
oversight IN the part of the speaker and
he would ask of Mr.. Unlisted, as a personal
favor, that he resign from the committee
in favor of Mr.. Bowen.
Mr.. BOWEN said he would not accept
under such circumstance.
Mr.. Unlisted said he would gladly de-
cline in favor of Mr.. Bowen.
MI. COLE moved that the vote by which
house bill No. S99 wa passed be recon-
sidered. Carried. He then moved not to
concur in the senate amendments and that
a conference committee be appointed.
Carried.
Mr.. SPEAKER appointed Mesers. Cole,
Bowen and Mccormick as such committee.
THE ATToRNEY-GENERAL's OPINION.
OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL,
Bismarck, n. D., March 10, $780,. !
To the Honorable House of Representa-
tives:
i have the honor to acknowledge receipt
of a communication from your honorable
body calling for my opinion upon the fol-
lowing questions:
1st. When does the present session of
the legislative assembly terminate BY
limitation Of time? Should the holiday
adjournment be counted as a part of the
120 days?
for returning after the holiday adjourn
ment?
An answer to the first two questions
calls for a construction of section IS of the
constitution, which reads as follows: "No
regular session of the legislative assembly
shall exceed sixty days, except in case Of
impeachment, but the first session of the
legislative assembly may continue for a
period Of 120 days."
The precise question to be determined in
the present instance is, whether the num-
Der of days mentioned in said section reg
ular session sixty and the first session l2O
days. is to be construed as limiting the
time by solar days within which the ses-
sion must terminate, or meaning as so
many legislative or working days. To
cOnstrue the language used as meaning so
many legislative or working days would
leave the question as to the date of final
adjournment to depend upon the action Of
the two branches, because a legislative day
might be made to cover two or more solar
days, and unless the two branches should
agree as to the legislative days there would
be q conflict between the two branches as
to the date of final adjournment. Where
the language used as in. this case seems
ambiguous and capable of two consrruc-
tons, that Interpretation should be
adopted that will make the result sure and
certain, and not leave it to depend on some
contingency. In the construction of a
constitutional provision affecting the legis-
lative body, the long established customs
and practices OF former legislatures with
reference to the same question are
entitled to great weight. 1t has been the
universal custom of the legislatures of the
territory of Dakota to construe the num-
Der of days mentioned in the Organic Act
CONTINUED ON PAGE Al