class of nominations, is within the objection made in reference to the amendment offered by Mr. Van Wyck, and is therefore not in order.

The President pro tempore (Mr. Sherman) overruled the question of order, and decided that the resolution was a simple declaration of opinion, and did not change or modify any of the standing rules of the Senate.

From the decision of the Chair Mr. Gray appealed to the Senate; and

On the question, Shall the decision of the Chair stand as the judgment of the Senate? After debate,

On motion by Mr. Hoar to lay the appeal on the table; yeas 30, nays 27. (See Cong. Record, pp. 2810-2813.)

60th Cong., 1st sess.; J., pp. 115–116.]

JANUARY 16, 1908.

Resolved, That no communications from heads of departments, commissioners, chiefs of bureaus, or other executive officers, except when authorized or required by law, or when made in response to a resolution of the Senate, will be received by the Senate unless such communications shall be transmitted to the Senate by the President. (See Cong. Record, p. 772.)

DISABILITY BILLS.

42d Cong., 2d sess.; J., pp. 80, 687, 688.]

DECEMBER 21, 1871.
MAY 8, 1872.

A bill which, as a separate measure, may be passed by a majority vote, shall not, when moved as an amendment to a disability bill, be ruled out of order for incongruity, inconsistency, or on account of not being germane. Decided by the Senate on an appeal from the decision of the Chair.

A bill to remove disabilities, which requires a vote of two-thirds to pass it, is up. A bill known as the "civil rights" bill is proposed as an amendment. Mr. Thurman raised a question of order, viz, that the amendment, being a measure which, if it stood by itself, could be passed by a majority vote of the Senate, is not an amendment that is germane to the bill and could not be attached to it, the bill itself requiring a vote of two-thirds of the Senate to pass it. The Chair (Mr. Anthony) overruled the point of order raised by Mr. Thurman. Mr. Thurman appealed, and after a lengthy debate the Senate sustained the decision of the Chair; yeas 28, nays 26. (See Cong. Globe, pp. 263, 274, 3181, 3182, 3187.)

[The uniform practice of the Senate has been, when an amendment to the Constitution of the United States is under consideration, or amendments to treaties, or to the resolutions consenting to their ratification, that the concurrence of two-thirds of the Members present is not necessary to decide any question for amendment or extending to the merits, being short of the final question.]

DISORDERLY WORDS IN DEBATE.

1. Relating to.

2. Thomas H. Benton.

3. Simon Cameron.

4. Benton-Foote.

5. Andrew P. Butler.
6. Willard Saulsbury.
7. Garrett Davis.
8. Charles Sumner.
9. L. Q. C. Lamar.

10. John T. Morgan.
11. Zachariah Chandler.

1. RELATING TO.

Jefferson's Manual, Section XVII, Order in debate, says:

*

"Disorderly words are not to be noticed till the Member has finished his speech. (5 Grey, 356; 6 Grey, 60.) Then the person objecting to them and desiring them to be taken down by the clerk at the table, must repeat them. * * When any Member has spoken, or other business intervened, after offensive words spoken, they can not be taken notice of for censure"

Clauses 2, 3, and 5 of Rule XIX provide:

"2. No Senator in debate shall, directly or indirectly, by any form of words impute to another Senator or to other Senators any conduct or motive unworthy or unbecoming a Senator." (Jefferson's Manual, Sec. XVII.)

"3. No Senator in debate shall refer offensively to any State of the Union.

*

"5. If a Senator be called to order for words spoken in debate, upon the demand of the Senator or of any other Senator the exceptionable words shall be taken down in writing, and read at the table for the information of the Senate." (Jefferson's Manual, Sec. XVII.)

2. THOMAS H. BENTON.

23d Cong., 2d sess.; J., p. 161.]

FEBRUARY 13, 1835.

Mr. Benton was called to order by Mr. Poindexter for words spoken in reply to certain observations of Mr. Calhoun; and the exceptionable words having been reduced to writing, were read as follows: "A bold and direct attack on truth."

The Chair decided "that, understanding the words used by the Senator from Missouri as intended only to deny the truth of charges which he considered to have been made against himself, and not as intended to impeach the personal veracity of the Senator from South Carolina, he did not consider them to be out of order."

From this decision Mr. Webster appealed, and the decision was overruled; yeas 21, nays 24. (See Cong. Globe, p. 239.)

3. SIMON CAMERON.

30th Cong., 1st sess.; J.,

p. 293.]

APRIL 20, 1848.

Agreeably to notice, Mr. Hale asked leave to bring in a bill relating to riots and unlawful assemblies in the District of Columbia.

On the question, "Shall leave be given?"

A debate ensued;

Mr. Hale having called Mr. Cameron to order for exceptionable words used in debate. The words were taken down as follows:

"The gentleman from New Hampshire has introduced this measure, as he has many others, for his amusement."

The Vice President decided that the words were not out of order.

From this decision Mr. Hale appealed; and

The question being put, "Is the decision of the Chair correct?"

It was determined in the affirmative. (See Cong. Globe, p. 656; Appendix 500–511. 4. THE BENTON-FOOTE INCIDENT.

31st Cong., 1st sess.; J., p. 290.]

APRIL 17, 1850.

Very grave personalities have been indulged in by Senators without the Senate taking any action thereon, as the Benton-Foote case, where the latter went so far as to draw a pistol from his pocket, cocking it, the pistol being a five-chambered revolver, fully loaded, as shown by Report No. 170, Thirty-first Congress, first session, made July 30, 1850, Journal, page 490. (See Cong. Globe, pp. 762-764, 1479, 1480.) 5. ANDREW P. BUTLER.

33d Cong., 2d sess.; J., p. 310.]

FEBRUARY 23, 1855.

During debate upon a Senate bill "to protect officers and other persons acting under the authority of the United States," a Senator from South Carolina (Mr. Butler), while replying to a Senator from Ohio (Mr. Wade), was called to order by Mr. Sumner for having used the following words:

"It is a debt of justice to my honorable friend from Connecticut, upon whom the gentleman from Ohio has poured out his wrathful and scornful indignation without any regard to justice, without any regard to the truth."

The President pro tempore (Mr. Weller) decided that in using those words the Senator from South Carolina was not out of order, as he simply impeached the memory of the Senator. (See Cong. Globe, p. 902; Appendix 225, 226.)

6. WILLARD SAULSBURY.

37th Cong., 3d sess.; J., p. 158.]

JANUARY 27, 1863.

Mr. Saulsbury, while discussing the bill relating to the suspension of the writ of habeas corpus, said: "Thus has it been with Mr. Lincoln-a weak and imbecile man-the weakest man that I ever knew in a high place, for I have seen him and conversed with him, and I say, here, in my place in the Senate of the United States, that I never did see or converse with so weak and imbecile a man as Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States." He was called to order and was required to sit down. From this decision of the Chair, Mr. Saulsbury took an appeal to the Senate, and was proceeding in further remarks when he was again called to order by the Chair for discussing the merits of the bill, which was not in order upon the question of appeal from the decision of the Chair on the point of order, and again required to sit

down.

But Mr. Saulsbury, still continuing his remarks, after he had been called to order, and required to sit down,

The Vice President directed the Sergeant at Arms to take him in charge for disorderly conduct; and

Upon the question, Shall the decision of the Chair from which the appeal was taken by Mr. Saulsbury stand as the judgment of the Senate?

It was determined in the affirmative. (See Cong. Globe, p. 549.)

7. GARRETT DAVIS.

38th Cong., 1st sess.; J.,

p. 165.]

FEBRUARY 17, 1864.

While Mr. Davis was addressing the Chair on the joint resolution to equalize the pay of the soldiers of the Army, said: "Sir, I think there ought to be inscribed

.on his (Wilson's) most impudent front the words, 'The self-constituted gagger of the Senate,' ," he was called to order by Mr. Wilson.

The Chair decided that the words spoken by Mr. Davis were a violation of the rules of the Senate, and that, being out of order, he could not proceed without the leave of the Senate; which being granted,

The Chair stated that Mr. Davis might proceed in order. (See Cong. Globe, p. 704) 8. CHARLES SUMNER.

39th Cong., 2d sess.; J., p. 111.]

JANUARY 17, 1867.

Senate bill 453, "to regulate the tenure of offices," being under consideration, and the question being on the amendment proposed by Mr. Sumner to the amendment made in Committee of the Whole, Mr. Sumner said: "We have never before had a President of the United States who was an enemy of his country."

The President (Mr. Anthony in the chair) stated that, in the opinion of the Chair, the language used by the Senator from Massachusetts did not transcend the latitude of debate heretofore allowed in the Senate, and was not therefore out of order.

Mr. Sumner, resuming his remarks, read the language used by him, as written down from the notes of the reporter, and to which exception had been taken, as follows:

“There, sir, is the duty of the hour. There was no such duty on our fathers; there was no such duty on our recent predecessors, because there was no President of the United States who had become the enemy of his country."

Mr. McDougall appealed from the decision of the Chair and afterwards withdrew the appeal.

Mr. Doolittle renewed the question of order upon the words spoken by Mr. Sumner and

The President decided that the words spoken by Mr. Sumner were not out of order. From this decision Mr. Doolittle appealed to the Senate; and

On the question, Shall the decision of the Chair stand as the judgment of the Senate? On motion by Mr. Lane that the appeal do lie on the table,

Mr. Doolittle raised a question of order, to wit: Is the motion of Mr. Lane, being a motion to lay an appeal from the decision of the Chair on the table, in order?

The President decided that the motion was in order; and

On the question to agree to the motion that the appeal do lie on the table,

It was determined in the affirmative; yeas 29, nays 10. (See Cong. Globe, pp. 525-528.)

9. L. Q. C. LAMAR.

45th Cong., 3d sess.; J.,

p. 449.]

MARCH 1, 1879.

On motion by Mr. Hoar to amend the amendment to the bill making appropriations for pension arrears by adding thereto the following words: Provided, That no pension shall ever be paid under this bill to Jefferson Davis, the late President of the so-called Confederacy.

During the debate,

Mr. Lamar, while addressing the Senate in reply to remarks by Mr. Hoar, having used the following language:

"I must confess my surprise and regret that the Senator from Massachusetts should have wantonly, without provocation, flung this insult"

He was called to order by the Presiding Officer (Mr. Edmunds in the chair), who decided that the words used were not in order.

From this decision Mr. Lamar appealed to the Senate; and

On the question, "Shall the decision of the Chair stand as the judgment of the Senate?"

It was determined in the negative; yeas 15, nays 16.

So decision of the Chair was not sustained. (See Cong. Record, pp. 2223-2227.)

10. JOHN T. MORGAN.

46th Cong., 1st sess.; J., p. 129.]

MAY 7, 1879.

In the discussion of an amendment bearing on the right of William Pitt Kellogg to retain his seat in the Senate, Mr. Morgan used the following language: "Has the Senator from Louisiana (Mr. Kellogg) any objection to the Committee on Privileges and Elections investigating the question whether or not he bribed the members of the legislature that elected him?”

A question of order was raised by Mr. Edmunds that it was not in order, where another Senator is personally concerned and a resolution is offered affecting his character, to propound such a question.

The President pro tempore (Mr. Thurman) decided that, in the opinion of the Chair, the language used by the Senator contained no imputation upon the Senator from Louisiana, and was in order. (See Cong. Record, pp. 1120, 1121.)

11. ZACHARIAH CHANDLER.

46th Cong., 1st sess.; J., p. 136.]

MAY 9, 1879.

The bill to prevent military interference at elections was under discussion, when Senator Chandler said:

"Sir, there are 12 Senators on that side of the Chamber who, every man upon this side believes, have a poorer title to their seats than the honorable Senator from Louisiana. By fraud and violence you occupy your seats."

Mr. Eaton raised a question of order, that it was not in order for a Senator to state that 12 Senators held their seats by fraud and violence.

The President pro tempore (Mr. Thurman) decided that the language used by the Senator from Michigan did not necessarily impute fraud and violence to the Senators who hold seats on the floor, and therefore was not out of order. (See Cong. Record, p. 1188.)