The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1895-04-13

Creer@Can you find in any body any
precedent for q majority OF all dele
gates or members elected voting Tor
an amendment?
Evans, of Weber-No, he cannot.
Van Horn-I do not know.
Hart Hits the President.
Hart said he had called UP the
same point as this early in the ses-
sion, when he had asked that the yeas
( and nays be called on every section
of every article. He had endeavored
to learn just where the convention
stood on the matter. The chair had
then ruled that only the article as a
whole needed a roll call and full
majority. This was generally agreed
to and the convention had proceeded
on that line. He objected 70 the chair
reversing itself If the chair was up
held it would be necessary TO go clear
back and take up every section OF
every article that had been passed.
Eldredge Mixes Things.
Eldredge said that the section is es-
sentiaIlv a proposition. The last
chance to vote on it was given when
the yeas and nays were called: II
that was not the purpose the call Tor
the yeas and nays was a waste d
time. -
place ourselves on record
Fldredge-Well some OF you are more
anxious TO put yourselves on record
than 1 am. ,,
beers should vote for section ana only
twenty against it. Would you say the
section was lost?
Eidredge-Do you mean by the yeas
and nays?
NJ, L
vote may be taken.
EIdredge-If it was taken by the
yeas and nays I'd say 1t was lost.
Oerisive laughter.
Thurman smiled quietly and Varian
turned his back on Eldredge, IN
supreme disgust.
Was it SubterfuGe:
Varian said he would like to ask If
this were not subterfuge. When men
want thing they may adjust their
mental lenses and see as they want
Would they say that in committee OF
the whole they could not adopt small
amendment without majority OF all
the delegates? Should the yeas and
nays be necessary as Eldredge had
said? The roll call was simply Tor the
purpose of putting members on record.
1t had no other reason for 1t. Members
mate conclusion and, if they sustained
the decision of the chair, must have
fifty-four VIC es on every amendment in
committee of the whole. This would be
absurd The whole idea was wrong.
Final passage of an article comes only
when all amendments have been made.
Then is the occasion for the majority
vote of all the members elect He
could not think they honestly believed
n "a ri
dents decision. If anybody had the
point would have been raised before.
He appealed to them not to override
the rules. They should act in a manly
American way. Let them bring in
their majority and then move a re-
consideration. Then if they could
bamboozle enough members into be-
lieving there was bounty in his amend
ment they could vote it down honestly.
Any other method would be dishonest
and injurious.
James said that the rule was one of
the plainest pieces of English he had
ever seen. He proceeded to define the
word proposition" and before he
finished he had used the word in no
less than a dozen different ways, each
one questionable in itself. He was in
coherent and members hardly knew
which side he was speaking on. At
length. however. he declared that the
rules bore out the presidents decision.
Violate Fundamental Rules.
Evans said that to sustain the de-
cision of the chair would violate the
fundamental rules of parliamentary
law. 1t is an elementary principle that
in any body may be
adopted by a majority of the quorum.
He was surprised to hear anybody
dispute it. He said, without fear of
successful contra liction, that if there
had been no politics in the question the
chair would never have made the de-
cision. If the principle were estab-
lshed there will be a difficult path for
the convention to travel. He appealed
that there should be no overturning of
parliamentary principles in order to
leave the state open to bounties and
that credit might be used for private
individuals and corporations
Squires called for the previous ques-
ton but he was voted down sum-
marily.
Partridge, of Utah. said that there
was misunderstanding of the word
That meant the whole
article. Varian's section had been
merely an amendment.
Goodwin SIaps Varian.
Goodwin said the situation had been
brought on by trick. The other side
had the majority and the secretary had
made an error. The president had
announced his decision before the
count could be challenged AS a mat
ter of self-preservation he would vote
to sustain the chair. The section was
simply 1.-The hair of the same dog that
was killed yesterday" His constitu-
ents in Salt Lake did not want this
section.
Creer-Is not Mr.. Varian delegate
from Salt Lake and is he not compe-
tent to judge Of the wishes of the
people?
Goodwin-Lately he seems to have
been a delegate at large.
Varian at the door looked ominous.
Wells-We could defeat this by re-
Goodwin-If anybody will move to
Wells-I am informed gentleman
who voted in the affirmative will do so. |
Goodwin am glad of It.
Ivins-WiH the gentleman now vote |
10 sustain the chair?
Goodwin-A good miner always keeps /
IN the ore. I will do SO.
Thompson said he would sustain the |
decision OF the chair. He had believed |
n that doctrine from the beginning
Evans, of Utah, said the whole spirit |
IF the rules was against fha decision