Sidebilder
PDF
ePub

Saturday,]

RULES AND ORDERS. — EARLE — LORD — CROWNINSHIELD -- SCHOULER.

motion to reconsider any such vote may be made only once.

Mr. GRAY, of Boston. I do not know that a more happy phraseology might not be chosen. No other, however, suggests itself to me. I take the true effect and intent of the Rule to be and I apprehend there will be no difference of opinion about it-that it is to prevent a question from being tried more than twice over. For instance, we will say that a proposition has been passed and a motion is made to reconsider; that reconsideration is rejected, and the proposition cannot be again brought up as a question. On the other hand, a proposition, we will suppose, in the first instance, is rejected; and then a motion is made to reverse that action by a reconsideration, and that motion so to reverse is rejected, then, Sir, the whole subject is dead.

But to answer directly the question of my friend on my right as to the effect of the phraseology "nor shall a subject be a second time reconsidered," I apprehend that a revival of the question of reconsideration in a subsequent stage could not, in any sense, be deemed a second reconsideration. And though, as I said before, the phraseology might possibly be revised, yet I am not prepared to say that to me it does not seem perfectly safe. Mr. EARLE. The only question of doubt seems to be whether by the Rule, as it stands, it ought to be understood that a motion to reconsider at a subsequent stage is in order, if the matter has been reconsidered at a former stage. There is no exception made in the language of the Rule, but it would seem to be absolute. If that is to be the construction given to the Rule, I think the effect would be injurious. We might have occasion to reconsider a subject in order to make some change; and subsequently, at another stage, it may be desirable, in order to make the matter agree with other portions of the ConstiThe Rule as it tution, to reconsider again. stands, would prevent that.

Mr. LORD, of Salem. Mr. President, I have no doubt, although I was not at the meeting of the Committee when this Rule was finally agreed upon, that the intention of the Committee was such as is suggested by the gentleman from Boston; that this Rule should not interfere with a reconsideration in a subsequent stage; and I desire, without moving any amendment, to suggest to the Convention, whether it would not be better to strike out that whole phrase, "nor shall any subject be a second time reconsidered." I believe, Sir, that this is the true construction of the present Rule of the House of Representatives. I believe, Sir, that it is not only a true construction of the Rule, but the best Rule we can make. That is to say, Sir, that just so long as this Convention is not satisfied with what it has done, it may reconsider its action, and when it is satisfied with what it has done, and rejects a motion to reconsider, then it shall not reconsider again. That seems to me, Sir, to be a Rule which is perfectly plain and easy to understand, and a Rule which we would better adopt.

It is objected, Sir, that if we give this construction to the Rule in question there is no end to reconsiderations. Well, Sir, my first answer to this is, that there should be no end to reconsiderations while we are dissatisfied with our action. While we think we have done what we ought not to have done, we should have the power to undo it; but when we are satisfied with our action, and

when we say we will not reconsider, and therefore reject a motion to reconsider, that ends the matter. Is not that a simple rule? And is it not a practicable one? Suppose that there is a proposition to adopt a particular amendment. After that is adopted, some gentleman suggests another improvement, which everybody sees at once, ought to be adopted. He moves to reconsider; that motion prevails; and the measure is passed again; whether amended or not amended, is not material. Afterwards, somebody sees that if the Convention were to pass again upon that subject, it would do differently. The present question is, whether they shall have the power of passing upon it again. I think they should. I think the question should remain open until the Convention has once decided that it will not reconsider. When they once reject the motion to reconsider, that ends the matter. Now I do not move any amendment to the Rule, but I suggest to those who feel an interest in the subject, whether it will not be better to strike out the phrase, "nor shall any subject be a second time reconsidered," leaving a question open to reconsideration so long as the majority of the Convention think that it ought to be reconsidered.

Mr. CROWNINSHIELD. I cannot agree with the gentleman from Salem, (Mr. Lord,) at all, in the view he takes of this question. Every body, who has had any experience in legislating in this Commonwealth,—and I believe the same is true of most legislatures in this country,knows that there is, perhaps, no one thing, which wastes more time, and more protracts the session, than this very question of reconsideration. It is a practice which has grown up in, and is wholly peculiar, to this country. In the parent country, from whence we derive all our parliamentary law, the practice is entirely unknown. It is carried to that extent, that a question having passed inadvertently, it is necessary in order to reconsider that matter to have a prorogation of parliament, and a new session commenced before it can be reached. That has at times given rise to some inconvenience, and there have been some, though very few modes of escaping from that difficulty. That was here found too stringent. I agree, that within certain limitations, there ought to be a power to reconsider questions. But, gentlemen will observe, as applicable to this Convention, that in the first place no subject of any importance, no subject touching the general matter for which we are assembled, can be passed upon until it shall have gone through, and been discussed in Committee of the Whole. It must then come back into the Convention, and be read and passed through two distinct stages before it is adopted. In either of these stages, it may be reconsidered; and I submit that the reconsideration allowed by this Rule, has a proper limitation to it.

I think, Sir, that there should be a still further limitation upon reconsiderations; which is, that there should be no reconsideration of any subject by a smaller vote than that by which the subject originally passed; because when a subject has passed by one majority, if it may be reconsidered by a smaller vote, it is in effect the smaller number over-riding the greater. I was in hopes such a provision would be put into the Rule.

The gentleman says, with some plausibility, that so long as the Convention chooses to reconsider, there should be the power to reconsider. I think not so. There should be some time when

[May 7th.

a matter is brought to an end. Gentlemen may continue to make motions to reconsider in every stage of the debate, and no person can ever when a matter is through. It is often the case in legislative bodies, that a question is passed, and the members of the majority feeling secure, go home to attend to other business, and then the whole matter is reconsidered in a much smaller body than that which originally passed it; which I think is neither fair, just, nor proper. I think this Convention will find, that unless they restrict themselves by some rule of this sort, the body may extend its session to an indefinite period of time. It is peculiarly true of large bodies like this, that matters are reconsidered in the manner I have stated, and thus there is a great waste of time and delay of business.

There is another matter, not strictly connected with this, but to which I wish to refer, as causing a great deal of waste of time in deliberative bodies. It is the matter of making special assignments. But it would not be proper to consider that subject at this time.

Mr. SCHOULER, of Boston. I rise for the purpose of moving an amendment to the Rule under consideration. It will be observed, that that Rule is different from the Rule of the House of Representatives, which is, "when a vote has passed, it shall be in order for any member of the majority to move a reconsideration on the same, or the succeeding day; and such motion (except in the last week of the session) shall be placed first in the orders of the day for the day succeeding that on which the motion is made." The Rule now under consideration reads-" When a vote has passed, it shall be in order for any member of the majority to move for a reconsideration thereof on the same or the succeeding day," the remainder of the Rule of the House, which I have just read, being omitted. I wish to move to amend by inserting after the words "or the succeeding day," the words "and such motion shall be placed first in the orders of the day for the day succeeding that on which the motion is made." My reason for that is, that the members of the Convention may be advised of the fact whenever a motion for reconsideration has been made. We may, for instance, on one day pass a vote, and the next morning some member may get up and move a reconsideration, and have that motion immediately considered, if I mistake not, unless the Rule now before the Convention be changed. I desire to have such motions go over to the next day in order to afford members who feel an interest in the matter an opportunity to be present and oppose or favor as they may desire. I think, therefore, this Rule ought to be so amended, that we shall not have motions to reconsider sprung upon us, and votes reversed when there is a thin house, or when members interested are absent, not expecting such motions to be made.

Mr. HALL, of Haverhill. It seems to me that the amendment just proposed to this Rule will be productive of no good result. The fact that a proposition to reconsider may be sprung upon the Convention operates one way equally as much as the other. If a gentleman desires to move a reconsideration of any vote to be taken, believing that the majority will be opposed to his desire, he will vote with that majority in order to have an opportunity to move a reconsideration. Besides, there will be this difficulty

Saturday,]

RULES AND ORDERS..

- GRAY-SCHOULER-SARGENT - HOOD WHITNEY

with the Rule should it be amended as proposed. If a motion to reconsider is made on a Friday it must go over until Saturday or Monday-the next day of meeting-when, as we all know, the Convention will be likely to be thin on account of members returning to and from their homes. Therefore the Rule as proposed to be amended would operate to as much disadvantage to the Convention, as in its present form.

I have no feeling about the matter. But it seems to me that the Convention would be as aware of a motion made under this rule, as of any other proceeding, and those interested will be present to take part in its consideration. The amendment seems to me to be unnecessary.

Mr. GRAY, of Boston. I hope the amendment proposed by my colleague, (Mr. Schouler,) will not be adopted. It seems to me that if an important vote is passed at any time, the members of the Convention interested, knowing that there may be a motion to reconsider the next day, will be likely to be present, the more especially if it be passed by but a small majority. If it is made upon the day upon which the vote is passed, and the majority choose to postpone its consideration until the next day, they can do so, as the majority will govern in that as in all other cases. Or if the majority desire to try the motion to reconsider at once, they can do so under the rule in its present form, whereas if it be amended as proposed, a single member can have it postponed until the next day.

Mr. SCHOULER. It seems to me that the amendment I have proposed is a very proper one, and will operate fairly towards all parties and persons concerned in the deliberations of this body. Every one knows that sometimes those interested in a question may be present when it is decided, and the next day-Saturday, for instance they may be obliged to go home for some reason or other. Under the Rule, as it now stands, we may discuss a matter for a week, pass upon it, and those interested in it, supposing it is settled, may be absent the next day, when some one may get up, move a reconsideration, have the motion acted upon immediately, reverse the decision of the day previous, and thus place the matter beyond the reach of this body. Now I wish, when a motion to reconsider is made, not to have it acted on at once, but go over to the next day, in order that those interested may be present and take part in its consideration. I hope my amendment may be adopted, and thus make this Rule conform to the Rule of the House, which has always operated well, and of which I have never heard any complaint. Otherwise we will be doing injustice to a great many members of this body.

Mr. GRAY. In order to reconcile the views of my colleague, (Mr. Schouler,) to some extent to my own, I move to strike out the words "the same or," so as to require the motion to reconsider to be made on "the succeeding day."

The PRESIDENT. That motion is not in order at this time.

Mr. SARGENT, of Cambridge. I do not exactly understand this Rule as it now stands, but if the amendment of the gentleman from Boston, (Mr. Schouler,) is adopted, I can then understand it. That amendment may operate so as to carry the subject in reference to which the motion to reconsider is made from before this body. The last clause of the rule now provides "that a mo

tion to reconsider a vote upon any collateral matter, shall not remove the main subject under consideration from before the Convention, but shall be considered at the time when it is made." That part of the Rule will have no application if the motion to amend be adopted, as in that case the subject under consideration must be postponed until the next day. If the amendment be adopted, that clause of this Rule, as it now stands, should be stricken out.

The question being taken upon the amendment proposed by Mr. Schouler, it was agreed to.

Mr. HOOD, of Lynn. I move to strike out the whole of this 24th Rule, and insert the following:

"A notice for reconsideration shall be in order at any time, and may be moved by any member of the Convention, but the question shall not be taken upon the same day unless by unanimous consent. If lost, it shall not be renewed, or any vote taken upon a reconsideration the second time, except by the consent of the Convention. If a motion to reconsider any vote be not made upon the same day upon which the vote shall pass, three days' notice shall be given of the intention to make it."

The amendment I have offered is the Rule of the New York Convention of 1846. It seems to me that it covers the whole ground, obviates every objection to the Rule as it now stands, and gives the Convention power to reconsider any vote it may have passed, at any time it may be deemed necessary. We do not wish to tie up our hands, but to leave every subject under our control, so that when we have passed from its consideration we can reconsider our action upon it should it be deemed expedient to do so.

Mr. GRAY, of Boston. This is an entirely new proposition, and perhaps on that account less weight should be attached to any opinion I may express upon it. It seems to me, however, to open the door for reconsideration a little too wide. In the first place, it allows any member of the Convention to move a reconsideration, not restricting it to a member of the majority, as was the rule of the last Convention of this State, and is now the Rule of our House of Representatives, and the Rule of the Congress of the United States. By the proposed amendment, after a question has been settled a week or more, any member of the Convention, by giving three days' notice, may move a reconsideration. I greatly prefer the Rule as it now stands.

Mr. HOOD. The objection of the gentleman from Boston, (Mr. Gray,) that by my amendment a motion to reconsider is not required to be made by a member of the majority, is not entitled to as much weight as may at first appear. It is very well known that when any question is to be decided by the Convention, or any other deliberative body, a person who wishes to move a reconsideration will vote with the majority in order to have that opportunity, although he may believe differently from that majority. According to the amendment I have proposed, if a motion to reconsider be not made upon the same day upon which the vote shall pass, it can still be made upon giving three days' notice, thus giving to the Convention the power to reconsider its previous action upon any subject, by having due notice given.

It appears to me we ought to make some distinction between our proceedings and those of

[blocks in formation]

the House of Representatives. We ought to leave this question of reconsideration fully open. Suppose that one of our committees has reported a proposition to the Convention which is adopted. Another committee may report another proposition in conflict with the one adopted, and that may be adopted also. The majority may be desirous to change the decision of the Convention upon the previous report, and can do so by giving three days' notice, or if a motion to reconsider has already been made and lost, they can still do so by obtaining the consent of the Convention to that effect, if my amendment be adopted. I have noticed, in reading the proceedings of different Conventions, particularly the Convention of New Hampshire, of 1850, that frequent changes were required on account of the fact that they could not know the nature of all the reports to be made, at the time they acted upon any one of them. I hope, therefore, this Rule will be amended as I have indicated.

Mr. WHITNEY, of Conway. I hope the proposed amendment will not prevail. It seems to me that it will be found to be fraught with many difficulties. Under such a Rule, it will be in the power of a few members of this Convention to prolong its session indefinitely. Though we may be about to adjourn, any member who may be dissatisfied with the previous action of this body upon any particular subject, may move a reconsideration, and three days must elapse before that motion can be considered and decided upon. Gentlemen must at once perceive that such a Rule as that would be impracticable. The Rule as it now stands is a Rule familiar to many members of this body who have been members of the House of Representatives. It is a Rule, as has been remarked by the gentleman from Boston, (Mr. Gray,) in accordance with the Rule of the Convention of 1820, and as now amended, will, I believe, be satisfactory to us as a Massachusetts Rule. I do not know, then, why we should travel into the State of New York for the purpose of giving greater latitude to the action of this Convention. If this Rule is altered as proposed, unless I am mistaken, motions to reconsider may be made from time to time, and thus prolong the session of this Convention, unless we should change the Rule hereafter, and I see no reason why we should pass any proposition with the expectation of altering it.

Mr. THOMPSON, of Charlestown. I am well aware that the proposed amendment is far more liberal than the Rule as it now stands. But at the same time, I do not think this body should bind itself by rules more stringent than those required by the House of Representatives. It may be necessary to reconsider again and again questions that may come before us, and it seems to me to be far more important to have the fullest latitude allowed in the consideration of the organic law of the State, than in the consideration of other laws. I have no fear that any member of the Convention will manifest a desire to prolong the session of this body unnecessarily, or take advantage of our rules to accomplish that object. In the legislature, some impolitic law may be passed. In that case, they will be succeeded by another legislature the next year, which can correct the evil. But should we make a mistake in adopting any portion of the Constitution, we shall have no body to succeed us to correct it. I think, therefore, that we should have the power

[ocr errors]

Saturday,]

RULES AND ORDERS. — LORD — HOOD — GRAY-HALL-HOOPER — THOMPSON — HUBBARD.

to reconsider again and again, as long as may be deemed necessary, and therefore I hope the proposed amendment may be adopted.

Mr. LORD, of Salem. I hold in my hand the Rule of the Convention of 1820, which, for simplicity, I think every gentleman will agree, is remarkable. It is as follows:

"When a motion has been made and carried in the affirmative or negative, it shall be in order for any member of the majority to move a reconsideration thereof on the same or succeeding day."

That Rule was adopted by a vote of 250 to 120. Any member of the majority could thereby move a reconsideration. It is founded upon the assumption that the body remains the same at all times, and not that one-half or one-third of the members will neglect their duty and be absent. Where any vote has been passed by a majority of the whole, it is useless to move a reconsideration unless some one of that majority has changed his mind. That is the theory of that Rule, and I am willing to continue it, upon the assumption that every member will attend to his duty, and if he does so, no vote can be reconsidered unless some in the majority change their votes, and therefore a motion to reconsider is required to be made by a member of the majority.

It is said by the gentleman from Boston, (Mr. Gray,) that according to the Rule as proposed to be amended, gentlemen may vote one way to-day and another way to-morrow, and still another way the next day. Very well; it is because of that possibility that I would allow this Convention to act until they can vote twice alike. If they cannot get their minds made up on any point so as to remain fixed for twenty-four hours, their action will not be worth sending to the people. There is no check upon us, no supervisory power, no other branch to correct any mistakes we may make, as is the case with either branch of the legislature. Our second thought may not be quite so good as our first, but our third thought may be wiser than either of the others.

Now, although I concur generally in the remarks of the gentleman from Lynn, (Mr. Hood,) and the gentleman from Charlestown, (Mr. Thompson,) in regard to affording the widest latitude for reconsideration, I would have two limits to it; the first, that no member shall move a reconsideration but one of the majority, because I would proceed upon the assumption that every member of this body will perform his duty; and secondly, that when a motion to reconsider has been made and rejected, that shall end the matter, because if the Convention come to the conclusion upon deliberation and upon second thought, that they are satisfied with what they have done, I would stop there, unless I could get a suspension of the Rules. But until we are satisfied with what we have done, and can vote twice alike, I would permit the Convention to have power to decide again. There are a great many of us-unless the other members of this Convention are more fortunate in that respect than I am-who come to a wiser conclusion upon a second thought than upon the first. There are who can see, after a thing has been done, many where there has been a mistake, and can do it better if it were to be done over again.

I believe that the whole object of the gentleman from Lynn can be accomplished by striking out

the sentence which I suggested when I was up before, and adding this qualification, that "if not made on that or the succeeding day, then three days' notice shall be given that it is to be made." I think all that is necessary is to strike out the phrase "nor shall any subject be a second time reconsidered," and insert, that "with the leave of the Convention a motion to reconsider may be made after the succeeding day, on giving three days' notice of the same." With that modification, we can have the largest liberty that may be desired.

Mr. HOOD, of Lynn. The proposition of the gentleman from Salem, will make the Rule substantially the same as the amendment, with the exception that it requires a member of the majority to make the motion. That I propose to strike out. The Rule which I have introduced is more simple in its construction, and more easily understood; and it covers the whole ground. It requires that the motion should be made on the same day, but that when notice is given, the vote shall not be taken upon the same day, except by unanimous consent. Now, I submit to the majority of this Convention whether they are willing to tie up their hands in regard to this matter. We have been sent here to deliberate upon questions of vital importance; and our constituents expect us to reconsider our votes if, upon calm, dispassionate judgment, we come to the conclusion that they are wrong. Now, what will be gained by retaining the words "of the majority"? If any member wishes to make the motion to reconsider, he can vote with the majority, and upon the next day he can vote for a reconsiderationso that practically, the requirement that the motion shall be made by a member of the majority, amounts to nothing. If a body has passed upon an important subject, and the vote happens to have been taken upon Saturday, or at some time when it was not expected, the vote may be reconsidered at the time. That has frequently been done, as all of us know who have been members of the House of Representatives. I take it for granted that no member of the Convention has come here with the intention of embarrassing the body by moving a reconsideration unless he thinks it necessary; and we ought to allow all that is consistent, with a proper regard for the rights of others.

The question being then taken on the amendment proposed by Mr. Hood, it was not agreed to. Mr. GRAY, of Boston. I move to amend by adding at the end of the 7th Rule the words "the names of members shall be called in alphabetical order." This was a Rule of the Convention of 1820, and I think it is desirable that it should be adopted by this body.

The question being taken, the amendment was agreed to.

Mr. GRAY. I also move, Mr. President, to amend the 11th Rule by inserting the words "to suspend any Rule," so that it will read as follows:

[ocr errors][merged small]

[May 7th.

Mr. HALL, of Haverhill. I think that is a very proper amendment. I intended to have inserted that clause when the Report was drayn up, and I hope it will be put in now.

The question being taken, the amendment was agreed to.

Mr. HOOPER. I move to strike out of the

24th Rule, the words "Nor shall any subject be a second time reconsidered." As it stands, it ties us up too closely,

Mr. THOMPSON, of Charlestown. I hope, in addition to that, that the words "of the majority," in the second line, will also be stricken out, and that it will provide that a motion to reconsider may be made at any time, upon three days' notice.

Mr. HOOPER. That involves three distinct propositions; and I prefer that the question should be taken upon each of them separately. I desire to have the amendment which I have proposed considered upon its own merits. It strikes me that we should have liberty to reconsider a second time, especially where reports are made, separate and detached from each other, so that when one comes in, no one knows what the others will be. It may then be necessary to have a reconsideration in order to make one portion of the constitution conform to another. We are not a legislative body, whose acts can be reviewed by another branch, and it is therefore necessary that we should make our work as perfect as possible before it goes out to the people, for their acceptance or rejection. I hope we shall strike out this clause, and then I will vote for engrafting the latter part of the gentleman's proposition; but I desire to have the question taken separately.

Mr. GRAY. I wish to say but a single word, for it is an unfortunate thing that discussions upon rules and orders are somewhat dilatory in their character. I think there is a serious objection to the proposition of the gentleman from Salem, inasmuch as it is a one-sided proposition. It is, that when you move to reject a motion you cannot go back and change it, but when you pass a motion you can. Now, if we adopt either, I prefer the suggestion of the gentleman from Charlestown, although it appears to me that that goes too far.

Mr. HOOPER. I will remark that the proposition of the gentleman from Charlestown, added to this, will make it equal on both sides, so that the negative and the affirmative will have an equal chance.

The question being then taken on the motion of Mr. Hooper, it was not agreed to.

Mr. HOOD, of Lynn. I now move to amend the 24th Rule by striking out the words "of the majority" in the second line.

Mr. HUBBARD, of Boston. I hope that motion will prevail. I believe it is the case in most bodies where a Rule like this exists, that a member of the minority may at any time, through the courtesy of members of the majority, obtain a motion for reconsideration. It is also well known, that oftentimes, members vote against their real purpose, in order to secure the privilege of making such a motion. There can be no doubt but this is frequently done where the yeas and nays are not called. Since the restriction to the majority produces no practical effect, I hope the motion will preqail to have it stricken out.

Mr. CADY, of Munson. I would suggest that instead of striking out those words entirely,

Saturday,]

RULES AND ORDERS.-HOOD-LORD-HUBBARD-WILSON.

the word "Convention" be substituted for the word "majority." That will accomplish the same object.

Mr. HOOD. I will accept that modification. Mr. LORD, of Salem. The change which is now proposed will introduce a new phraseology. We have here, "every member when about to speak," "no member shall speak more than twice," "no member in debate," &c., but the expression "member of the Convention" is not to be found. I do not see why this designation should be applied in one case, and not elsewhere. The question being then taken upon the amendment as modified, it was not agreed to. The question then recurred upon the adoption of the Rules and Orders as amended.

Mr. HUBBARD. There has been a good deal of discussion, and a variety of views have been submitted to this body in regard to the provisions of these Rules; and I will move, in accordance with the course adopted in the Convention of 1820, that the Rules be recommitted for further consideration.

The question being then taken, on a division, there were-ayes, 96; noes, 131: so the motion was not agreed to.

Mr. WILSON, of Natick. I move, Mr. President, to amend the 24th Rule by striking out the words "of the majority," in the second line. I am willing that any individual in the Convention shall have the right, when in his judgment a proposition before the Convention can be put in a better form, of moving a reconsideration. I am willing to throw this open to all, without confining it to the majority.

The motion was agreed to.

The question then recurring on the adoption of the Rules and Orders as amended, they were adopted, as follows:

RULES AND ORDERS.

Of the President.

1.

The President shall take the Chair every day at the hour to which the Convention shall have adjourned; shall call the members to order; and, on the appearance of a quorum, shall cause the Journal of the preceding day to be read, and proceed to business.

2.

He shall preserve decorum and order; may speak to points of order in preference to other Members; and shall decide all questions of order, subject to an appeal to the Convention on motion regularly seconded; and no other business shall be in order till the question on the appeal shall have been decided,

3.

He shall declare all votes; but, if any member doubts a vote, the President shall order a return of the number voting in the affirmative, and in the negative, without any further debate upon the question. When a vote is doubted, ⚫ the Members for or against the question, when called by the President, shall rise and stand uncovered till they are counted.

He shall rise to put a question, or to address the Convention, but may read sitting.

5.

In all cases the President may vote.

6.

When the Convention shall determine to go into Committee of the Whole, the President shall appoint the member who shall take the Chair.

7.

On all questions and motions whatsoever, the President shall take the sense of the Convention by yeas and nays, provided one-fifth of the Members present shall so require. When the yeas and nays are taken, no Member shall be allowed to vote, who shall have entered the Convention after the calling of the roll is finished. The names of members shall be called in alphabetical order.

8.

He shall propound all questions, in the order in which they are moved, unless the subsequent motion be previous in its nature; except that, in naming sums and fixing times, the largest sum and the longest time shall be put first.

9.

After a motion is stated or read by the President, it shall be deemed to be in possession of the Convention, and shall be disposed of by vote of the Convention; but the mover may withdraw it at any time before a decision or amendment, except a motion to reconsider, which shall not be withdrawn after the time has elapsed within which it could be originally made.

10.

When a question is under debate the President shall receive no motion, but to adjourn, to lay on the table, for the previous question, to postpone to a day certain, to commit, to amend, or to postpone indefinitely; which several motions shall have precedence in the order in which they stand arranged.

11.

He shall consider a motion to adjourn as always in order; and that motion, and the motions to lay on the table, to take up from the table, to suspend any rule, and for the yeas and nays, shall be decided without debate.

12.

He shall put the previous question in the following form: "Shall the main question be now put?"-and all debate upon the main question shall be suspended until the previous question shall be decided. After the adoption of the previous question, the sense of the Convention shall forthwith be taken upon amendments reported by a committee, upon pending amendments, and then upon the main question.

13.

On the previous question no Member shall speak more than once without leave; and all incidental questions of order, arising after a motion is made for the previous question, shall be decided without debate, excepting on appeal, and, on such appeal, no Member shall be allowed to speak more than once without leave of the House.

14.

When two or more Members happen to rise at

[May 7th.

once, the President shall name the Member who is first to speak.

15.

All committees shall be appointed and announced by the President, unless otherwise specially directed by the Convention.

16.

The President shall have the right to name any Member to perform the duties of the Chair, but such substitution shall not extend beyond an adjournment.

17.

The President shall have the general direction of the Hall of the Convention, and of the Galleries. No person excepting Members, Officers, and attendants of the Convention, and such persons as may be invited by the Convention, or by the President, shall be admitted within the bar of the Convention. The Chairman of each Committee of the Whole, during the sitting of such Committee, shall have the like power of preserving order in the Hall and in the Galleries.

Of Absence of President.

18.

In case the President shall be absent at the hour to which the Convention was adjourned, the Secretary shall call the Convention to order, and shall preside until a President pro tempore shall be elected, which shall be the first business of the Convention.

Of Members.

19.

A seat shall be assigned to each Member in such manner as the Convention shall determine, which shall not be changed without leave of the President.

20.

No Member in debate shall mention a Member then present by his name, but may describe him by the town he represents, the place he sits in, or such other designations as may be intelligible and respectful.

21.

Every Member when about to speak, shall rise and respectfully address the President, shall confine himself to the question under debate, and avoid personality, and shall sit down when he has finished. No Member shall speak out of his place without leave of the President.

22.

No Member speaking shall be interrupted by another, but by rising up to call to order.

23.

No Member shall speak more than twice on one question, without first obtaining leave of the Convention; nor more than once, until other Members, who have not spoken, shall speak, if they desire it.

Of Reconsideration.

24.

When a vote has passed, it shall be in order

Saturday,]

for any Member to move for a reconsideration thereof, on the same or the succeeding day, and such motion shall be placed first in the orders of the day for the day succeeding that on which the motion is made: a motion to reconsider being rejected shall not be renewed; nor shall any subject be a second time reconsidered: provided, however, that a motion to reconsider a vote, upon any collateral matter, shall not remove the main subject under consideration from before the Convention, but shall be considered at the time when it is made.

25.

No Member shall be obliged to be on more than two committees at the same time, nor Chairman of more than one.

26.

No Member shall be permitted to stand up, to the interruption of another, while any Member is speaking, or to pass unnecessarily between the President of the Convention and the person speaking; nor shall any Member be permitted to stand in the alleys during the session of the Convention.

27.

Every Member shall keep an account of his own attendance and travel, and deliver the same to the Committee appointed to make up the payroll, and, on his failure so to do, he shall be omitted from the roll; and no Member shall receive pay for any week day on which he has not actually attended, except in case of sickness.

28.

Every Member who shall neglect to give his attendance in the Convention for more than six days after the session commences, shall, on making his appearance therein, be held to render the reason of such neglect; and in case the reason assigned shall be deemed by the Convention sufficient, such Member shall be entitled to receive pay for his travel, and not otherwise; and no Member shall be absent more than two days, without leave of the Convention; and a vote of leave of absence shall be inoperative, unless the Member obtaining it shall avail himself of it within five days.

29.

When any Member shall be guilty of a breach of either of the Rules and Orders of the Convention, he may be required by the Convention, on motion, to make satisfaction therefor, and shall not be allowed to vote, or speak, except by way of excuse, till he has done so.

30.

Every Member, who shall be in the Convention when a question is put, shall give his vote, unless the Convention, for special reasons, shall excfise him. Any member desiring to be so excused on any question, shall make application to that effect before a division, or before the calling of the yeas and nays; and such application shall be accompanied by a brief statement of reasons, and shall be decided without debate.

31.

Every motion shall be reduced to writing, if the President shall so direct.

[blocks in formation]
« ForrigeFortsett »