USA > Michigan > Michigan legislative manual and official directory for the years 1899-1900 > Part 15
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55 | Part 56 | Part 57 | Part 58 | Part 59 | Part 60 | Part 61 | Part 62 | Part 63 | Part 64 | Part 65 | Part 66 | Part 67 | Part 68 | Part 69 | Part 70 | Part 71 | Part 72 | Part 73 | Part 74 | Part 75 | Part 76 | Part 77 | Part 78 | Part 79
The question whether a member could be compelled to vote on a bill which he had never heard read at length, has troubled more than one legislature; and also whether reading by the title only satisfies the constitutional requirements of three several readings. The practice, however, has of late years been in accordance with the ruling in the Williams' appeal in 1865; which was in effect that the question of how much reading the senate or house would hear and how much dispense with, was entirely within the control of those bodies. In fact, to rule otherwise is to put the time of the legislature in the control of two or three obstructionists who would do nothing but listen to reading from the clerk's desk.
17. Under the operation of a call and after the sergeant-at-arms had been dispatched after the absentees generally, a resolution to send the sergeant-at-arms after certain members (naming them), who have remained absent since the beginning of the [extra] session, was held not in order, as its adoption would be resolving a second time to do a thing which the house had already ordered .- H. J. 1870, p. 151.
There is no reason for differing from this opinion, although the first order contemplates arrests without written warrants within the limits of the capitol building, while the resolution seems to refer to members at their homes in other parts of the state, for whose arrest the ser- geant-at-arms would need written authority.
16
122
THE LEGISLATURE.
18. The senate having refused to order a call of the senate, a motion that the sergeant-at-arms be directed to request the attendance of a senator was held out of order .- Barry's Appeal, S. J. 1841, p. 258.
Then, if the senate refuse to order the arrest of an absentee, under a call, it would be thereby barred from mildly asking his attendance. Strictly speaking, there is but one way of securing the attendance of absentees-arrest.
19. A motion for a call of the senate is a debatable question .- S. J. 1850. p. 432.
Except when had under the operation of a previous question. See senate rule 44.
20. Under a call of the house and after the bar had been closed and the sergeant-at-arms dispatched after the absentees, it was held that, as a quorum was present, the business of the house could proceed .- Chamberlain's Appeal, H. J. 1855, p. 191.
When the call is occasioned by a lack of a quorum it is the practice, upon the finding of a quorum, to suspend all action under the call, ex- cept the, bringing in of absentees, and to proceed with business; but many calls are for the purpose of securing a full vote on some pending question, and the fact of a quorum well understood when the call is ordered.
21. The senate transmitted to the house a resolution described in the message as a "concurrent resolution," although headed with the usual formula of a joint resolution, i. e., "Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the State of Michigan." On motion to concur in the adoption of the resolution the point of order was raised that the reso- lution was a joint and not a concurrent resolution, and must take the course of a bill. Held, that it was a concurrent resolution, and the mo- tion to concur in order .- Bushnell's Appeal, H. J. 1859, p. 130. See also Bushnell's Protest, p. 187.
Of course the words "Resolved by the Senate (the House concurring), would have been the better form, but a concurrent resolution has no prescribed form, and, therefore, could not be out of order on the ground of form only.
22. Held, that a committee of conference may recommend amend- ments to such parts of a bill as have been previously agreed upon by both houses .- Clark's Appeal, H. J. 1850, p. 448.
Wrong. It is only questions of disagreement that are referred to a conference committee. All that part of a bill which has passed both houses needs no committee.
23. A conference committee having recommended certain new amendments, the question of order was raised that a committee of conference has no right to report and the senate no right to concur in new amendments,' which have not been the subject of disagreement between the two houses. Held, that the report of the committee was in order .- Isbell's Appeal, S. J. 1850, p. 425.
New amendments to parts of the bill which are in dispute, are in or- der. The field of action is limited to those questions upon which the houses have not agreed. The disagreements were referred to the com- mittee.
24. Held, that all votes given for a candidate who, on the day of the election, was a postmaster under the United States, were absolutely void in accordance with Sec. 6, Art. IV, of the constitution. Sutherland v. Iloyt, H. J. 1853, pp. 26, 62; Morrow v. Horton, S. J. Feb. 24, 1891. The two houses, in the practical construction given in this section of the constitution, seem to have recognized a distinction between those
123
LEGISLATIVE DECISIONS.
holding state and county offices, and state contractors, on the one hand, and persons holding appointments under the United States. Graves v. Hussey, S. J. 1855,, p. 154; Id. p. 69. See Minority Report, p. 76, H. J. 1859, p. 420. Though in the case of two members who held the position of assistant assessor and assistant marshal under the United States, the house refused to recognize it as constituting ineligibility .- H. J. 1870, pp. 84, 89, 92.
The question of ineligibility under this clause of the constitution, while often raised and discussed, has never been definitely settled by the practice of the legislature. The provision of the constitution which declares that each house shall "judge of the qualifications, elections and returns of its members," makes the question one of little practical importance.
25. The house having once passed upon a contested election case re- fused to revoke and set aside it determination, although the supreme court had meanwhile declared unconstitutional the staute upon which the determination of the house had been based .- H. J. 1865, p. 1056. The same position was taken in the senate (S. J. 1855, p. 594), and that body also refused to adopt a resolution declaring it "the sense of the senate that no senator, the right to whose seat is involved in the resolutions reported from the committee on privileges and elections is entitled to vote upon the question of the adoption of either until the question of the right of each of his seat shall have been decided by the senate."- S. J. p. 595.
By the constitution each house is the only judge of its own member- ship. There is no court of appeal from its decisions.
26. A senator has no right to change his vote on the record, after the journal has passed out of the possession of the secretary, on the ground that he voted under a misapprehension .- S. J. 1873, p. 941.
As well might his constituents change their votes, so as to elect his opponent of the campaign. To vote is to decide. He may place himself right on the record by an entry under "Question of privilege."
27. The president pro tem. in the chair having voted as a senator when his name was called, gave the casting vote on a tie. An appeal taken on the ground that he could not vote twice-once as a senator and once as president pro tem .- was laid on the table .- Drake's Appeal, S. J. 1840, p. 370.
The president of the senate is authorized to vote in case of a tie only. Every member of the senate must vote when required to do so. The president pro tem. (as such) is nowhere required to vote.
28. A division on the question on concurring in certain amendments recommended by a committee of conference was held not in order .- Britain's Appeal, H. J. 1850, p. 449.
The report of such a committee cannot be amended. A division might result in an amendment, therefore it is not in order.
29. A motion to commit with instructions is divisible, and the ques- tion must first be put upon the commitment. If that does not prevail the question on instructions fails .- H. J. 1851 (Ex. Session), pp. 44, 46.
There can be no doubt of it. The only wonder is that any such ques- tion was ever raised.
30. A motion to strike out all after the word "Resolved," in a joint resolution is not divisible .- Fuller's Appcal, S. J. 1842, p. 92.
Wrong. If there was more than one distinct proposition in the part to be struck out, it was divisible; but the division could be as well secured by a motion to strike out any part less than the whole, which motion would take precedence of the motion to strike out the whole.
ยท
124
THE LEGISLATURE.
31. The rules directing the galleries cleared and the doors closed when the senate goes into executive session, includes all in the cham- ber, except senators, president, secretary and sergeant-at-arms .-- Hawkin's Appeal, S. J. 1840, p. 206.
All but those who are officially held.
32. A motion to indefinitely postpone the consideration of a motion to lay on the table a motion to take up a certain bill for consideration, was held not in order .- Summer's Appcal, S. J. 1840, p. 298.
A motion to table takes precedence of a motion to indefinitely post- pone. If it is claimed that the latter motion did not relate to the bill, but to the former motion only, then it is clearly out of order.
33. After the third reading of a bill, and pending the vote on the pas- sage thereof, a motion to postpone indefinitely was held out of order .- Snow's Appeal, S. J. 1853, p. 71.
Why? It would be hard to suggest a better place for such a motion.
34. Joint resolutions must take the same course as bills .- Pratt's Appeal, S. J. 1845, p. 48; Mason's, p. 97; Grisicold's, S. J. 1853, p. 170.
Bills and joint resolutions are the same, so far as legislative action on them is concerned.
35. Held, that it is necessary for a minority to have leave of the sen- ate before making a report .- Greenly's Appeal, S. J. 1840, p. 479.
A minority is not a committee, and has no rights beyond those that pertain individually to members. Courtesy gives minorities a hearing.
36. A report having been accepted and adopted from a committee of conference, a subsequent report, purporting to be a minority report, was held to be out of order .- S. J. 1847, p. 478.
It could be received only by courtesy; and if action had been had on the majority report, it was too late even for that. The constitution gives the greater latitude for the entry of protests upon the journals so that minorities and individuals can put themselves upon record with- out question.
37. A motion to exclude the report of minority from the journal was held in order .- Summer's Appeal, S. J. 1850, p. 27.
It should hardly require a motion to exclude, as it could not be print- ed in the journal, if objection was made, without affirmative action by the senate.
38. The point was raised that it is not competent for a committee, after the expiration of the fifty days' time for introduction of bills, to report to the house a substitute for a bill referred to them, which sub- stitute is entirely irrelevant to the subject matter embraced in the title, as it is a new bill and cannot be introduced after the constitu- tional limit. Held, that the speaker has no control over the action of a regular committee of the house on the subject matter referred to them; that it is competent for a committee to amend a bill as they see fit, and that it is competent for the house to concur or non-concur in their action when reported to the house .- H. J. 1869, p. 1329.
The constitutional prohibition of new business after fifty days would make the standing in the courts of a law passed under such circum- stances very questionable; but the holding has usually been as indi- cated in No. 8 above .- that it was a matter for the legislature rather than the presiding officer, to decide.
39. Matters of general legislation cannot be introduced in the senate after the expiration of the fifty days, in the guise of a concurrent reso- lution .- Phillip's Appcal. S. J. 1869, p. 1481.
125
LEGISLATIVE DECISIONS.
See comments on the preceding ruling of Nos. 8 and 38.
40. Held, that the oath of office could not be administered to the sec- retary elect while a motion to reconsider the vote by which he was elected was lying on the table .- Loomis' Appeal, S. J. 1848, p. 11.
Which ruling would be equivalent to saying that unless they took from the table that reconsideration and disposed of it, the senate could have no secretary to the end of the session, or that no business would be in order until that question was disposed of.
41. The speaker called a member to order and directed him to take his seat, for alluding disrespectfully to another branch of the govern- ment .- Hay's Appeal, H. J. 1845, p. 413.
Technically correct, but extreme in practice.
42. Held, that it is not in order for the house to entertain a resolution similar in import to one already passed by the house and transmitted to the senate .- Cartter's Appeal, H. J. 1845, p. 390.
Doubtful. I think for a speaker to rule a resolution out of order for that reason would be arbitrary. The house itself would be a better judge of the propriety of waiting indefinitely for senate action.
43. A member in the course of his second speech on the same ques- tion was called to order. Held, that the point of order should have been raised when the member first rose to speak. As it was not, the mem- ber was entitled to the floor .- Cutcheon's Appeal, H. J., 1861, p. 1076.
If the member was out of order when he began, I fail to see how he got in order by continuing.
44. A proposition to commit with instructions being before the house, a motion to commit without instructions is not in order, as the object sought could be more directly reached by dividing the question before the house .- H. J., 1870, p. 79.
Much the easier method. See No. 29 above.
45. Held, that it is not in order for a member on the floor to speak of the "acts of a committee when in committee."-Greenly's Appeal, S. J. 1840, p. 479.
Must the senate thereby be deprived of all the facts that influenced the committee? Or rather does not this ruling relate to the fact that certain matters might come before the committee of which it would be improper to speak in the senate?
46. The secretary having commenced to call the roll, all debate is out of order .- Etheridge's Appeal, S. J. 1840, p. 469.
When the first vote is recorded, nothing is in order but to proceed with the roll call.
47. A motion to lay on the table a motion to take from the table was held not in order .- Summer's, Appeal, S. J. 1839, p. 405.
Parliamentary law is supposed to be calculated to establish simple and regular methods for a legislative body to do business, not to mud- dle it up, as would be indicated by such a motion.
48. Held, that until a select committee is discharged, a bill and its report thereon are not in the possession of the senate and a motion to lay the same on the table is not in order .- Denton's Appeal, S. J. 1845, p. 252.
When a bill is reported to the senate it is in the possession of the senate and subject to its action, whether reported by a standing or a select committee. The simplest way for a committee to dispossess
.
126
THE LEGISLATURE.
itself of a bill is to report it; and when they have done so the bill must be either in possession of the senate or in the air. The act of reporting the matter referred to it dissolves a select committee.
49. A motion having been made to refer a bill and a substitute to a committee a motion made pending that to lay the substitute on the table was held out of order .- Thompson's Appeal, S. J. 1849, p. 609.
A motion to lay on the table cuts off all other motions by house rule. 28; but by senate rule 34 the previous question has priority. It is im- possible to reconcile this decision with the usual rules of practice. The motion to table the substitute, if it had prevailed, would have carried with it the original bill.
50. The chair refused to entertain a motion to lay on the table a mo- tion to lay a concurrent resolution on the table .- Summer's Appeal, S. J. 1850, p. 515.
Of course he did. See comment on No. 47.
51. A motion to suspend a rule is in order, even though the house is not on the order of "Motions and Resolutions."-Hawley's Appeal, H. J. 1849, p. 353.
So far as the suspension may relate to pending business, and no further.
52. A demand for the previous question was held out of order on a motion to postpone indefinitely .- Chase's Appeal, H. J., 1857, p. 629.
Under our present rules the question of indefinite postponement is not debatable. A motion for the previous question is made to close debate. It cannot be necessary in such cases as this, for there can be no debate to close.
53. A motion for the previous question takes precedence of the mo- tion for the call of the senate .- S. J. 1850, p. 431.
Senate rule 44 defines exactly the standing of these motions, and their exact relative positions.
54. The senate having adjourned pending an appeal relative to re- ceiving and entering on the journal a protest; upon convening again, the president held that as the appeal related to a privileged question, it must take precedence of the regular order of business .- S. J. 1850, p. 434.
According to congressional practice a protest against the action of the house or senate is not properly a question of privilege. Proper questions of privilege are of the highest order and supersede all others. By our constitution it is the right of any member of either house to have placed in the journal his protest as to any proceeding or resolu- tion.
55. The senate corrected the journal of the preceding day in relation to a report of a committee of conference. Mr. Conger, as chairman of said committee, entered a "protest against the action of the senate in altering the journal by amending the report of the committee of con- ference, contrary to the facts in the case, as unjust to the committee and an innovation upon all ordinary usages of legislative bodies." The senate then reconsidered the motion to correct and the same was lost. -S. J. 1858, p. 119.
The reading at length each morning of the previous day's journal for correction, is something seldom omitted in congress. Corrections are then in order to make the journal a true record of what transpired. In the Michigan practice, this reading is usually omitted, and the journal considered approved, unless some member calls attention to an error. In the above case it would seem that the journal was changed from a
-
127
LEGISLATIVE DECISIONS.
true to a false statement, and that was aggravated by the fact that by the change parliamentary law was violated. No wonder, then, that the great objector objected.
56. A portion of the previous day's proceedings may be expunged from the journal .- Cust's Appeal, S. J. 1845, p. 130.
Such has long been the practice.
57. A report having been laid on the table, held, that the same could not be ordered printed until first taken from the table .- H. J. 1859, p. 727.
Strictly true. Yet it has been the custom to print all reports in the journal without reference to their final disposition.
58. Held, that a substitute for a bill, which was in possession of the committee of the whole, could not be printed until the committee had been discharged from the further consideration of the bill .- H. J. 1861, p. 173.
Right. Yet constructively, nearly all the bills at the printing office during the session are in the hands of the committee of the whole.
59. Held, that papers which have been referred to a committee may be ordered printed by the senate before being reported back by said committe .- Barry's Appeal, S. J. 1841, p. 285.
As a matter of convenience, this has been the practice, to direct the secretary or clerk to procure the printing of certain papers in the hands of committees, or on the table, preparatory to their considera- tion, without the formality of discharging the committee or taking from the table.
60. On the reconsideration of a certain motion, a senator declined to vote on the ground that he was not present when the vote was taken upon which the reconsideration was had. Held, that the motion to re- consider was a constituent part of the first motion, and he could not be required to vote .- Mason's Appeal, S. J. 1844, p. 341.
Every member in the hall, when the question is stated from the chair, must vote unless excused. It is hard to see, if the reconsidera- tion was properly stated, how the senator could be excused from vot- ing.
61. A paper which is not confined to a discussion of the action ob- jected to, but contains reflections on the house, is not a protest within the meaning of the constitution .- Chamberlain's Appeal, H. J. 1849, p. 411.
Webster says a "protest" is a solemn declaration of opinion. Un- doubtedly the framers of the constitution, when they so freely granted every member the right of protest of record, intended just that and nothing more.
62. A motion to reconsider the vote by which the sergeant-at-arms was dispatched after the absentees is in order .- Cartter's Appeal, H. J. 1845, p. 389.
Yes; but he is usually sent only under the operation of a call, and the same purpose is more easily accomplished in our practice by a motion "to dispense with all further proceedings under the call."
63. A motion to reconsider cannot be entertained after the bill has passed out of possession of the house. The proper motion is that the senate be requested to return the bill .- II. J. 1850, p. 210.
By rule, a reconsideration is in order on the same or next succeeding day. Any member desiring to do so can secure the holding of a bill for these two days by publicly giving notice that he will move to recon- sider the vote by which the bill was passed; but if for lack of notice or lapse of time the bill has gone from the possession of the house,
128
THE LEGISLATURE.
then very properly the motion should be "that the senate be requested to return."
64. A notice that a motion will be made tomorrow to reconsider a vote was held not to cut off an immediate motion to reconsider .- H. J. 1861, p. 1370.
No; nor does the failure of the motion on the first day prevent the trial of the question again on the morrow, in accordance with the no- tice. See No. 63.
65. A motion to reconsider in the senate is not in order while the resolution is in possession of the house .- Mason's Appeal, S. J. 1844, p. 223.
Reconsideration is only in order for a limited time. Notice having been given, the bill or resolution must be held until the expiration of the time. See rule 40, and decisions Nos. 63 and 64.
66. A motion to reconsider a vote by which an appeal was tabled was held out of order .- Eldredge's Appeal, S. J. 1848, p. 405.
Correctly so.
67. A motion to reconsider a vote by which the senate refused to re- consider another vote was held out of order .- Fenton's Appeal, S. J. 1846, p. 502.
Correctly so. In the senate, reconsideration is in order three several days. With proper notice the question may be tried once only each day. Rule 40.
68. A motion to reconsider is not in order after the bill has been sent in the house.
See comments on Nos. 63 and 65.
69. A resolution to allow the respondent in proceedings on a breach of privilege to withdraw his answers to the interrogatories propounded to him by the senate was held out of order, as the answer would form part of the journal and could not be withdrawn .- Mason's Appeal, S. J. 1845, p. 437.
Courts allow prisoners to change their pleas. Was it not competent for the senate, by resolution, to do the same?
70. The official journal cannot be altered so as to record a member's vote on a question three days after the determination of that question. -H. J. 1862, p. 30.
It cannot. The only possible relief for a member in such a dilemma is a question of privilege.
71. A concurrent resolution containing matter not included in the governor's message to an extra session, was held in order and properly before the house, because the right of the house to act upon concur- rent resolutions does not depend upon the recommendation of the gov- ernor; and the resolution having been received and acted upon by the house, the privilege of raising the point of order had been waived .- H. J. 1862, p. 30.
A technical evasion of both the points named.
72. A member having offered for introduction a joint resolution under the order of "Motions and resolutions," after the expiration of the fifty days' limit for the introduction of bills, the speaker ruled the same out of order, on the ground that joint resolutions are considered the same as bills, by both the constitution and the rules of the house, and the receipt of either at that time would be the receipt of new business, and would be in conflict with the constitution .- Thorp's Appeal, H. J. 1879, p. 1036.
See comments on Nos. 8, 34 and 38.
-
MICHIGAN SCHOOL FOR THE BLIND, LANSING. Main Building.
129
LEGISLATIVE DECISIONS.
73. The legislature of 1839 met in joint convention before the senate had elected a president pro tempore. The speaker of the house called the convention to order, and continued to preside. On a motion to ad- journ a tie vote resulted in each house. The speaker, who had voted as speaker with the representatives, on the announcement of the vote, de- cided, as presiding officer, that the president of the senate should give the casting vote. Whereupon the president arose and gave the casting vote in the affirmative, and the convention adjourned .- Hawkin's Ap- peal, H. J. 1839, p. 175.
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.