The Montgomery advertiser., 1901-08-14

is thereby cut of. Now, when l comes up for final passage. the Con sention may either accept or reject II. The vote was taken upon that Ques- ton. as to whether the article should be accepted or rejected, and the ar- ticie was passed. l understand the gentleman from Greene now moves to reconsider the vote whereby the arti- cie was passed. The Chair does not | recoliect that any motion to reconsider that vote has been made or submitted. He will hear from the gentleman from raiiadega on that point. | MT. Graham (Tailadega)-df the mo- ton has not been made to reconsider. then all of this discussion of the ques- tion would be out of order.
 The President--No motion had been made up to the time the genetiemar from Greene entered 1t. That is the point. The Chair would like to hear from the gentleman from Tailadega. Mir. Grahau,-I beg the indulgence of the Chair that l may reply to few remarks made. by the way, by the gentleman, in arguing his point and in his beading ignorance of pariia- mentary Jaw. l am satisfied that the Convention appreciates the modesty of the gentleman and will excuse him on that ground. Now then as to the point to which the Chair invites my re- marks. I submit. in thts case. is a 1 distinction without a difference. The vote by which this article was ordered expressed.
 The President-And to a third read ing.
 MT. Graham-And to a third reading. and that motion failed. The article was engrossed. reported without change. and put upon its passage in 1 nd Wt WtHlx insiy adopted. Theer were only two votes against it.
 The President-Now the motion is to reconsider the vote by which 1t was adopted.
 Mr. Graham-The motion s to re- consider the vote by which the article was adopted. being the identical ar ticie which was ordered engrossed and which the Convention refused to recon sider before it was engrossed. and understand the distinguished President to say that after 1t is engrossed. It is not open to amendment.
 The President-True.
 Mir. Graham-And if after being en- grossed. 1t is not open to amendment. l ask the Chairman of this Convention and the Convention itself for what purpose. in reason, could it be recon sidered at this stage!
 The Presidential could be rejected.
 MT. Graham-It could he reconsider ed for the purpose. as l understand the intimation of the President, of re- jecting the whole article. and I ask the gentleman If it is his purpose. in making the motion, to reject the ar ticle on judiciary? pause for reply.
 The President-The point the Presi- dent wants to hear the gentleman on is not the propriety of doing 1t. or whether the Convention will or will not reconsider. but whether the motto" 1 to reconsider is in order
 MT. Graham-I am not questioning l the propriety of the reconsideration. I auk under the intimation of the Chair # 1t cannot be reconsidered for amend ment, then for what purpose would l reconsideration be. As understand, the Chair acauiesces that 1t Is for the re- lection of the whole article and not for amendment. Now I come back. When would we cease to reconsider question:
 Mir. Reese-I rise to a point of order. The gentleman Is not stating point of order. He Is arguing what might be the effect of a reconsideration of tho vote. and arguing on the merits or the proposition to reconsider.
 The President-The Chair was anx- ious to have the benefit of the gentle mans experience. and called on him to address himself to that point. The understanding of the Chair is that it Is competent for the Convention to re- consider any vote. and It may recon sider a number of votes excessively and any vote that the Convention takes is subject to motion to re- consider It is true a motion to re- consider a vote whereby this article was ordered engrossed and to third reading was voted down and capnoa again be renewed. but this was sep- arate and subsequent vote. whereby the article was adopted Unless the gentleman desires to be heard further upon that point the Chair Is ready to rule
 MT, Graham--I desire to be heard further and I regret exceedingly that have not tho precedence and grasp In see that I am going astray when 1t Is so readily seen by the gentleman from Dallas. and intimated by the Chair.
 The President-Th Chair intimates nothing in the matter.
 Mir. Graham Then I withdraw the remarks. as to the Chairman.
 Mir. Oates-If the delegate from Tal- ladega will allow me a moment on the point.
 MT Graham-I would be glad to yield a portion of my time.
 MT. Graham-I think the Chair is en- tirely right as 60 this motion to re- consider the vote by which the article was finally passed. Now that may be done. but what is the neext step? To reconsider the vote by which 1t was or dreed engrossed and read third time, which Is precluded by the former mo- ton to reconsider. which was voted down and laid upon the table. When they reached that point l do not see how they can go any further. but tnls motion that the delegate from Greene nronoses I think is in order
 MT. Graham-Notwithsta the distinguished authorities (beginning with the gentleman from Dallas), aeainst my proposition, I want to say that we lose sight of the identity os The proposition, I want to say that we lose sight of fhe identity of the proposition and ds insist that my point is well taken' because the propositions are ldenu. cal and the Chair cannot lose slght or | the identity of the propositions which are attempted to be reconsidered. That ia the point rest this whole thing unon. If they were separate matters, | then I would yield readily, as l may have to do anyway. but l want to say that the doctrine held by the Chair sometime ago of res adjudicata, applies | to this question, because of the identity of inc propositions, where ;he engross- ed article is the article we adopted. We | refused to reconsider the engrossed
 raNaN fA