question of privilege within the meaning of the rules, and was in order at this time, and that the question of consideration could be determined by a majority of the Senate. On appeal, the Chair was sustained; yeas 29, nays 28. (See Cong. Record, pp. 728, 729, 730.)

On the next day (November 29) the Vice President (Mr. Wheeler), in reply to a parliamentary inquiry, said that the question of the consideration of a resolution to seat a Senator was a question of privilege which can be dispensed with only by unanimous consent (Record, p. 749), and the Senate thereafter proceeded day after day to consider the pending resolution until disposed of, immediately after the reading of the Journal.

17. LANGUAGE CHARGING FRAUD, BRIBERY, ETC., ON MEMBERS OF THE LEGISLATURE, NO IMPUTATION UPON SENATOR ELECT. 46th Cong., 1st sess.; J., p. 129.]

MAY 7, 1879.

Mr. Morgan, while addressing the Senate on the proposed amendment bearing on the right of William Pitt Kellogg to retain his seat in the Senate, having used the following language:

"Has the Senator from Louisiana (Mr. Kellogg) any objection to the Committee on Priviledges and Elections investigating the question whether or not he bribed the members of the legislature that elected him?"

Mr. Edmunds raised a question of order, 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 from Alabama contained no imputation upon the Senator from Louisiana, and was in order. (See Cong. Record, pp. 1120, 1121.) 46th Cong., 1st sess.; J., p. 136.]

MAY 9, 1879.

The bill to prevent military interference at elections was under discussion when Mr. Chandler, while addressing the Senate upon the said bill, having used the following language:

"Sir, there are twelve 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 twelve Senators held their seats upon the floor of the Senate 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.)

18. CHAIR HAS NO AUTHORITY TO REQUIRE, DECLINING TO VOTE, TO ASSIGN REASONS THEREFOR.

46th Cong., 3d sess.; J., p. 388.]

MARCH 3, 1881.

The Presiding Officer (Mr. Cockrell) decided that the Chair had no authority, on his own motion, to require a Senator declining to vote to assign his reasons therefor. (See Cong. Record, p. 2423.)

19. AN AMENDMENT AFFIRMING PRINCIPLES MERELY, TO A RESOLUTION DECLARING A SENATOR ENTITLED TO RETAIN HIS SEAT, NOT IN ORDER.

52d Cong., 1st sess.; J., pp. 135, 136.]

MARCH 3, 1892.

A resolution declaring Fred T. Dubois entitled to retain the seat occupied by him as a Senator from the State of Idaho was pending; an amendment was submitted to

strike out all after the word "resolved" and inserting, "That the vote or other proceeding that constitutes a choice of a Senator of the United States must be had by the legislature of the State in which such Senator is chosen, and until the houses of such legislature have met and organized as legislative bodies they can not choose a Senator of the United States," etc.

A question of order was raised that the amendment is simply a declaration of principles and decides nothing; that it is offered as a substitute for a resolution which relates to a question of the highest privilege, namely, whether the sitting member was or was not duly elected a Senator from the State of Idaho, and that it neither declares the contestant elected nor does it declare there was no election. The question of order being submitted to the Senate, the Senate, by a vote of 9 yeas to 51 nays, decided that the amendment was not in order. (See Cong. Record, pp. 1671-1676.) 20. PENDING CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION FOR THE ADMISSION OF A, A MOTION TO PROCEED TO THE CONSIDERATION OF EXECUTIVE BUSINESS IS IN ORDER.

52d Cong., 2d sess.; J., p. 178; special sess.]

MARCH 29, 1893.

The Vice President (Mr. Stevenson) decided: That pending the consideration of a resolution for the admission of a Senator, a motion to proceed to the consideration of executive business was in order. (See Cong. Record, special sess., pp. 48, 49.)

21. RESOLUTION TO CORRECT THE JOURNAL TO SHOW PRESENCE OF, MUST LIE OVER ONE DAY ON OBJECTION.

53d Cong., 1st sess.; J., p. 74.]

OCTOBER 16, 1893.

Mr. Dolph submitted an order that names of Senators Allen and Kyle be recorded in connection with the roll call to show their presence, they being present in the Chamber.

Objection to its consideration having been made,

The Presiding Officer (Mr. Faulkner) decided that the order was in the nature of a resolution, and came within the terms of the rule which requires that all resolutions, if objected to, shall lie over one day for consideration.

Ib.; J., pp. 75, 76.]

OCTOBER 17, 1893.

The Journal of yesterday's proceedings having been read, Mr. Dolph asked the present consideration of the order submitted by him yesterday, since it was in effect a proposed amendment of the Journal, and should be disposed of before the approval of the Journal;

When,

The Vice President (Mr. Stevenson) ruled that the above order was in the nature of a resolution coming over from a previous day, to be laid before the Senate for consideration under the call for "concurrent and other resolutions." A motion was then made to correct the Journal by recording Mr. Allen as present on the above roll call; which motion was laid on the table-yeas 45, nays 3. (See Cong. Record, pp. 2544-2549, 2575, 2580, 2601, 2629, 2637, 2638.)

22. MAY SIT WHEN SPEAKING.

15th Cong., 1st sess.; J.,

p. 340.]

APRIL 9, 1818.

It was unanimously agreed to suspend the third rule for conducting business in the Senate, as it respects the honorable Mr. Dana, of Connecticut, to wit:

"Every Member when he speaks shall address the Chair, standing in his place, and when he has finished he shall sit down."

23. DECLINING TO VOTE, ALTHOUGH SENATE REFUSES TO EXCUSE. 53d Cong., 1st sess.; J., pp. 71-73.] OCTOBER 13, 14, 1893.

Senator may not vote when the Senate refuses to excuse him.

Mr. Peffer, while addressing the Senate, sent to the Secretary's desk to have read a memorial of a convention of commercial bodies of the United States, printed by order of the Senate as Mis. Doc. No. 24, Fifty-first Congress, second session.

Mr. Teller objected to the reading of the paper; whereupon the Vice President (Mr. Stevenson) submitted the question to the determination of the Senate, under Rule XI, "Shall the paper be read, as requested?" Yeas, 39; nays, 30. So it was determined that the paper should be read.

Before announcement of the result of the first vote on reading the paper, Mr. Vilas called the attention of the Chair to the fact the Senator from Idaho, Mr. Dubois, was present and not voting, and asked that under Rule 12 he be required to assign his reasons for declining to vote; whereupon the Vice President directed the name of Mr. Dubois to be called; and Mr. Dubois having declined to vote and having assigned his reasons therefor, the Vice President submitted the question to the Senate, "Shall the Senator, for the reasons assigned by him, be excused from voting?"

Mr. Teller raised a question as to the presence of a quorum.

The roll being called showed 43 Senators present, being a quorum.

On question to excuse Mr. Dubois from voting, the yeas were 5, nays 24.
No quorum voting, Senate adjourned.

The question being, "Shall the Senator from Idaho, Mr. Dubois, for the reasons assigned by him, be excused from voting on the question of the reading of the paper called for by Mr. Peffer?" yeas, 29; nays, 37.

So the Senate refused to excuse the Senator from voting; whereupon the Vice President (Mr. Stevenson) again directed the name of the Senator to be called, and he again declined to vote. No further action was taken on the refusal of the Senator to vote. (See Cong. Record, pp. 2469-2479, 2509, 2510.)

24. A, HAVING THE FLOOR, OBJECTION BEING MADE, MAY YIELD ONLY FOR A QUESTION.

62d Cong., 1st sess.]

JULY 14, 1911.

The bill to promote reciprocal trade relations with the Dominion of Canada being under consideration

The Presiding Officer (Mr. Oliver in the chair) ruled that, objection being made, the Senator having the floor can yield only for a question. (See Cong. Record, p. 2927.)

Same point decided the same way by Mr. Reed, presiding officer, in the chair, July 19, 1911. (See Cong. Record, pp. 3040, 3041.)

25. A, MAY BE INTERRUPTED WITHOUT HIS CONSENT FOR PURPOSE OF MAKING A MOTION TO CLOSE THE DOORS. 62d Cong., 2d sess.; J., p. 79.]

JANUARY 15, 1912.

ARBITRATION TREATIES WITH GREAT BRITAIN AND FRANCE.

Mr. Rayner, in pursuance of notice given, proceeded to address the Senate on the subject of the general arbitration treaties between the United States and Great Britain and France;

When,

SESSION WITH CLOSED DOORS.

Mr. Lodge moved that the doors be closed; and the motion having been seconded, Mr. Rayner raised a question of order, viz, that having addressed the Chair and

24143°-S. Doc. 1123, 62-3- -34

having obtained the floor he could not be interrupted by any Senator, without his consent, for the purpose of making a motion.

The President pro tempore (Mr. Bacon) overruled the point of order and held that the purpose of the rule is that any matter which may be before the Senate may be arrested for the purpose of considering the question whether or not it shall be proceeded with in open or in secret session of the Senate; and

Thereupon,

He directed that the galleries be cleared and the doors closed. (See Cong. Record, pp. 942, 943.)

26. A, HELD AS PRESENT TO MAKE A QUORUM AS DISCLOSED BY THE ROLL CALL JUST HAD FOR THE PURPOSE OF ASCERTAINING THAT FACT.

62d Cong. 2d sess.; J., p. 221.]

An omnibus pension bill being under consideration.

MARCH 20, 1912.

On motion by Mr. Smith of Georgia, to amend the bill by striking out, on page 1, lines 6 to 10, inclusive, as follows:

The name of Thomas Jefferson, late of Company C, One hundred and twenty-third Regiment United States Colored Volunteer Infantry, and pay him a pension at the rate of $24 per month in lieu of that he is now receiving.

After debate,

On motion by Mr. McCumber, to lay the amendment on the table,

Mr. Smith of Georgia demanded a division of the Senate.

On the question to agree to the motion to lay the amendment proposed by Mr. Smith of Georgia on the table,

The yeas were 21 and the nays were 5.

The number of Senators voting not constituting a quorum,

The Vice President (Mr. Sherman) directed the roll to be called;

When,

Forty-nine Senators answered to their names.

A quorum being present,

The question being again taken on the motion by Mr. McCumber, to lay the amendment proposed by Mr. Smith of Georgia on the table.

On a divisjon of the Senate,

The yeas were 31 and the nays were 8.

So the amendment was laid on the table.

Mr. Smith of Georgia raised a question of order, viz, that the Senators voting did not constitute a quorum, and therefore the laying of the amendment proposed by him on the table was not in order.

The Vice President (Mr. Sherman) overruled the point of order, and held that, while a quorum had not voted, a quorum was present, as disclosed by the roll call just had for the purpose of ascertaining that fact. (See Cong. Record, pp. 3674-3678.) 27. WHEN THE UNFINISHED BUSINESS IS LAID BEFORE THE SENATE IT DOES NOT TAKE A, FROM THE FLOOR. 62d Cong., 2d sess.]

MAY 24, 1912.

The bill H. R. 18642, to amend an act to provide revenue, equalize duties, etc. (metal schedule), being under consideration,

The VICE PRESIDENT (Mr. Sherman). Does the Senator from Idaho yield the floor? Mr. HEYBURN. Yes, I understand when the unfinished business comes up it takes a Senator from the floor.

The VICE PRESIDENT (Mr. Sherman). It does not take him from the floor. It substitutes some other business, but it does not take the Senator from the floor. Of course, the matters which the Chair has laid down the Chair has a right to lay down at any time. (See Cong. Record, p. 7084.)

SESSIONS.

45th Cong., 1st sess.; J., p. 21.]

OCTOBER 18, 1877. Subjects referred to committees at last session should be returned to same committees at next.

The Senate decided that all subjects referred to committees and not reported upon at the close of the last preceding session of the Senate in March last, and returned to the office of the Secretary of the Senate, should be returned to the several committees to which they had been previously referred. (See Cong. Record, pp. 107, 108.)

SIGNING OF BILLS.

SIGNATURE TO BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS BY PRESIDENT OF THE SENATE, NO QUORUM BEING PRESENT.

25th Cong., 3d sess.]

MARCH 3, 1839.

Joint resolution for distribution in part of the Madison Papers being presented for signature of the President of the Senate (W. R. King, of Alabama), it being past midnight on 3d of March, 1839, and no quorum present, the President first ruled he could not sign the resolution when a quorum was not present, and so stated to the Senate. (See Cong. Globe, p. 232.)

On further consideration and consulting the rules, the President pro tempore said he was of the opinion that it did not require a quorum to be present to authorize the signing of a bill or joint resolution. It was not properly an act of legislation, but merely a signing to be done by the Chair to authenticate the act. Holding this opinion, the Chair signed the resolution. (See Cong. Globe, p. 233.)

SINE DIE. (See ADJOURNMENT.)

531