from a window to get something to eat. Their hungry colleagues excused them.

Later on sandwiches were brought in; cigars were lowered from the gallery; the Senators engaged in a game of white men and Indians, with Senate files and wastepaper baskets as ammunition and the President's desk the principal fort; visitors filled the gallery and gazed with astonishment upon the unusual scene. Still, Senator Cassidy could not be found.

Along toward midnight it was discovered that Senator Hare had, for the second time, escaped from the room, this time clearly to block the Senate in the event of Cassidy being found. The hunt from then on was to find Hare as well as Cassidy. The sergeant-at-arms was directed to call to his assistance the entire police force and sheriff's force of Sacramento county, and of such other counties as might be found necessary. The search was extended to San Francisco.

At one o'clock the following morning, actors from a Sacramento theater were brought in to help keep the Senators awake. Later on a band was introduced. At 3 o'clock, nine hours and a half 314 after the call of the Senate had been ordered, a curious "gentlemen's agreement" was entered into between the two factions. The terms of the agreement were:

(1) The Senate was to be held to be in continuous session, whether the Senators were present in the chamber or not.

(2) No Senator was to raise the question of quorum. (3) Every Senator present was held to be bound in

314 The money cost to the State of keeping the Senate in session those nine and a half hours was estimated to be $1200.

honor to be back in the Senate Chamber promptly at


(4) The proceedings were, at noon, to be held to be precisely where they were at 3 A. M., the hour at which the agreement was entered into.

Upon this understanding the doors were opened and such Senators as desired to do so were permitted to leave. Several of them, however, remained in the chamber until the end of the proceedings.

Before noon both Cassidy and Hare had been found. Hare was captured in a barber shop; Cassidy as he was entering his apartments at Sacramento.

But when the hour of noon arrived, only thirty-six Senators were in the Senate chamber. Hare and Cassidy were detained in the Sergeant-at-Arms' office. Senators Finn and Beban were not in their seats. After waiting until 12:30 the Senate was called to order.

There was no way to determine officially that Finn and Beban were absent except by roll call. Senator Wright moved that the roll be called. It was an important moment for the absent Finn and Beban. But the point of order was raised that a roll call could not be had during the call of the Senate.815 President pro tem. Boynton, who was in the chair, held that the point was well taken.316

315 My own notes have it that this point of order was raised by Senator Wolfe. The Senate Journal of March 21-although it was afternoon of March 22, the Senate by parliamentary fiction was in session as of March 21-shows that the point was raised by Senator Shanahan. Senator Shanahan informs me that it is unlikely that he raised this point. As a matter of fact, roll-call could have been compelled on a motion to discontinue the call of the Senate.

316 It will be noted that the previous evening, when the absence of Campbell, Hare, Hans and Tyrrell was discovered, the roll was called, although the Senate was then under the order of call of the Senate, the same call which was in force at the time the motion affecting Finn and Beban was made. The point was not raised in the first instance, however.

In the midst of the discussion, for Senator Thompson insisted that under parliamentary practice roll call was in order, Finn and Beban entered the Senate chamber. The matter of roll call was dropped, and Cassidy brought before the bar of the Senate.

Wolfe moved that Cassidy be excused for his absence from the Senate chamber.

Senator Thompson moved as a substitute that Cassidy be permitted to take his seat, and that further consideration of Wolfe's motion be made a special order for Thursday, March 23.

The vote was taken on Thompson's substitute motion. If Thompson's motion prevailed, Cassidy's case would be given consideration before a vote to excuse him was taken.

If Thompson's motion were defeated then Wolfe's motion would be immediately acted upon, and Cassidy, in all probability, excused without trial, much less, punishment.

Thompson's substitute motion was defeated by a vote of 15 to 21.817

After the defeat of Thompson's substitute, Wolfe's original motion prevailed. The Senate excused Cas

317 The vote on Thompson's motion was as follows:

For Thompson's substitute: Avey, Bell, Bills, Birdsall, Boynton, Cutten, Estudillo, Gates, Hewitt, Larkins, Roseberry, Stetson, Strobridge, Thompson and Wright-15.

Against Thompson's substitute: Beban, Black, Bryant, Caminetti, Campbell, Cartwright, Curtin, Finn, Hans, Holohan, Juilliard, Lewis, Martinelli, Regan, Rush, Sanford, Shanahan, Tyrrell, Walker, Welch and Wolfe-21.

sidy.318 Cassidy took his seat.819 The Senate, which had awaited Cassidy's coming for nearly twenty hours, resumed the session's work where it had been stopped the previous afternoon by Cassidy's disappearance.

Wolfe moved that further proceedings under call of


318 The excusing of Cassidy was generally condemned. the Sacramento Union of the incident in its issue of March 24: "The nineteen-hour call of the Senate became a farce when Senator Cassidy was promptly excused and allowed to resume his seat without even a reprimand. The people of the State will not take the legislators seriously if they do not conduct themselves with some dignity. They should have taught Cassidy a lesson and impressed him with the serious nature of his offense.

"Cassidy's excuse about the visit to the friend and his beautifully innocent story of ignorance can be taken for what each considers them worth, but the fact remains that he cost the State several hundred dollars in the idleness of the Senate and in prosecuting the search. We need not worry over the discomforts he caused his colleagues, if they see fit to overlook them. For the sake of a proper respect for the State's law-making body, however, we think the irresponsible Senator from San Francisco should have been severely punished.

"In that memorable call San Francisco held a prominent place, for during the long hours of Monday night the only other member to give the Senate trouble was Hare from the same city. But that was not all. After 3 o'clock in the morning, it will be recalled,__ the Senators under solemn promise to return promptly at noon Tuesday were allowed to go to their beds. Noon came, but two Senators failed to put in an appearance until it was convenient for them to do so. Who were they? Why, from San Francisco, of course-Finn and Beban."

319 Two days later, March 24, Cassidy made the following explanation which will be found in the Senate Journal of March 24:

"Mr. President: It was understood that there would be no night session of the Senate on Tuesday, March 22d (21st), and after making my report as chairman of the Committee on Engrossment and Enrollment, at about 4:20 p. m., I was called to attend a meeting of the Assembly Committee on Public Health and Quarantine. They desired to consider my bill (Senate Bill No. 961), which is known as the 'Oyster Bill,' and had been pending final action at their hands for some weeks. After leaving this meeting, I went to my committee room, that of Engrossment and Enrollment, to ascertain if there were any further reports to make before adjournment. I was informed that everything had been reported to the Senate. It was then 5 o'clock p. m. Thereafter I left the building to keep an engagement which I had made, and spent the night with friends. When I left the Senate Chamber, Senate Bill No. 965 was not under discussion, and no call of the Senate was anticipated by me.

"When I arose the following morning I was greatly surprised to read the press accounts of the Senate call, and the great trouble my absence had caused the members thereof. This was the first knowledge I had of it.

"I desire to express to the President and my fellow members of the Senate, the deep regret I feel for this unfortunate occurrence."

the Senate be dispensed with. The motion prevailed. Hare took his seat without being questioned as to his escape from the Senate chamber.

On the question of reconsideration of the vote by which the Anti-Injunction bill had been passed, Cassidy voted in the negative. This tied the vote,320 with all the Senators voting, giving the Lieutenant-Governor the deciding vote.

But before Wallace could announce his vote, Wolfe raised the point of order that the deciding vote vested in the Lieutenant-Governor applies only to the vote on the original passage of a bill, and not on a question of reconsideration.

President Wallace declared the point not well taken, and voted for reconsideration.821

The reconsideration of the Anti-Injunction bill in the Senate was accordingly accomplished by a vote of

320 The vote on Gates's motion to reconsider the vote by which the Anti-Injunction bill had been passed was as follows:

For the motion to reconsider: Avey, Bell, Bills, Birdsall, Boynton, Curtin, Cutten, Estudillo, Gates, Hewitt, Holohan, Hurd, Larkins, Roseberry, Rush, Stetson, Strobridge, Thompson, Walker and Wright-20.

Against the motion to reconsider: Beban, Black, Bryant, Burnett, Caminetti, Campbell, Cartwright, Cassidy, Finn, Hans, Hare, Juilliard, Lewis, Martinelli, Regan, Sanford, Shanahan, Tyrrell, Welch and Wolfe-20.

321 The deciding vote was cast only after extended debate over Wolfe's point of order.

Senator Wright, in opposing Wolfe's contention, fell back upon the Constitutional provision that the Lieutenant-Governor "shall be President of the Senate, but shall only have a casting vote therein." Wright contended that no restriction is placed upon the casting vote, and that the provision holds in a tie of the Senate in a matter of reconsideration as well as in any other.

Senator Wolfe claimed that as in Rule 50 of the Standing Rules of the Senate it was stated that it took 27 votes to carry any motion to reconsider any Constitutional amendment, and in the same rule declared that it took 21 votes to carry any motion to reconsider a vote, therefore as in the case of the casting of 27 votes, the President could not give a casting vote; and as in the case of the 27 votes the President's vote could not in any event

« ForrigeFortsett »