June 15, 1864 (2)

Mr. ASHLEY. I rise to a privileged question. I move to reeonsidei the vote by which the constitutional amendment was j* cted this afternoon.

The SPEAKER. The motion will be entered.

Mr. COX. 1 move to lay the motion to reconsider on the table.

The SPEAKER. That motion is not in order.

Mr. COX. What will be the effect of the motion made by tin* gentleman from Ohio?

The SPEAKER. L can be called up at any! time.

Mr. COX. How did the gentleman vote?!

The SPEAKER. With the prevailing side,

Mr. HOLMAN. I rise to a point of order. It is that, so far ns the mere question of the constitutional amendment !S concerned, a two thirds vote is necessai y; but wmi reference to everything else pertaining to a vote in this House the ordinary rules govern; und therefore, to enable a party to move to reconsider, he should have voted in the majority instead of with the prevailing side, and therefore a member who voted in the minority cannot move to reconsider.

Mr. BROWN, of Wisconsin. I raise another point of order.

The SPEAKER. The Chair will decide one point of order at a time. That is about as much as the Chair can decide at once. [Laughter.]

The Chair overrules the point of order raised by the gentleman from Indiana, [Mr. Holman.] The gentleman from Ohio has a right to make the motion to reconsider. The Clerk will read from Barclay s Digest, page 162.

The Clerk read, as follows:

"A fair construction of this rule will permit a member who has voted with the prevailing wide on a tie vote to move a ieron idei uion Such is evidently the spirit ol the rule, and >ueh iid> been the subsequent practice."

The SPEAKER. The practice is that any member who has voted on the prevailing side can move to reconsider, and the gentleman from Ohio voted with the prevailing side.

Mr. COX. Was this a tie vote?

The SPEAKER. It was not a tie vote, it is true; but the spirit of the rule applies precisely the same to this case. A member who votes on the side which succeeds on the vote can move a reconsideration. That has been the practice, and the Chair so decides.

Mr. COX. By what vote can the reconsideration be carried two thirds or by a majority?

The SPEAKER. By a majority vote; but on the passage of the joint resolution a two thirds vote is required

Mr. COX. We never can end the question* under that ruling of the Chair so long as there is a majority in favor of the resolution and not two thirds.

The SPEAKER. The gentleman is incorrect, as but one reconsideration can be moved on any question. That exhausts the powerto reconsider.

Mr. FERNANDO WOOD. Within what period can the motion to reconsider be made?

The SPEAKER. On thisday or to-morrow, under the rules, and after to-morrow the motion to reconsider cannot be withdrawn by the gentleman from Ohio, except by the consent of the MrJ3ROWN of Wisconsin, i make the point of order that the Speaker has already decided that we are acting ns m Committee of the Whole.

The SPEAKER. That is true.

Mr. BROWN, of Wisconsin. And that the rules applicable to that committee are applicable to us now. I submit, therefore, that being tn Committee of the Whole the motion to reconsider cannot be made.

The SPEAKER. The Chair overrules that point, of order, for the reason that although the House has voted to act upon this bill as in Committee ofthe Whole, yet it is the House of Representatives still, or else the present occupant of the chair could not be in the chair. There is one member ofthe House who is not privileged to preside in Cummittee of the Whole, and that is the Speaker. Some other mem bur must occupy the chair, because the Committee of the Whole must make a report to the House, and the Speaker must be in the chair to receive that report.

Mr. BROWN, of Wisconsin. The other rules applicable to the Committee of the Whole apply to us, as the llou e has decided that the rules applicable to the Committee of the Whole now prevail, and therefore it is that I say this motion cannot be entertained.

The SPEAKER. The Chair would overrule the point of order on the additional suggestion of the gentleman from Wisconsin from thefactthat this is the House of Representatives, and the yeas and nayscan be called, and can be taken on an adjournment, or on a motion to lay upon the table. Neither of iho se motions can be made in Committee of the Whole; and yet the Chair, with the general consentof the House, has entertained a motion to adjourn several times this even-

Mr. COX. I propose to call the previous question on the motion of my colleague [Mr. Ashley] at this time.

The SPEAKER. The gentleman cannot do that, for the reason that the rule requires that when a motion to reconsider is submitted at a time when other business is progressing, if must be entered on the Journal. The Chair will have the rule read from Barclay s Digest, page 152.

The Clerk read, as follows:

It is in order on the same or succeeding day to move a reconsideration and have it entered, but it cannot ho taken up and considered while another question is before the flouj e

Mr. COX. Why cannot I make the motion to lay the motion to reconsider upon the table now?

The SPEAKER. Because it would be in direct conflict with the rule which has just been read.

Mr. COX. 1 do not propose to take the motion to reconsider "up," but to lay it on the table. [Laughter.] Imakethe point of order that I have a right to make my motion now if my colleague had a right to make his.

The SPEAKER. The Chair overrules the point of order, under the express language of the rule that a motion to reconsider can be entered but not called up when other business is before the House.

Mr. COX. All I propose is to have my motion entered now.

The SPEAKER. The gentleman cannothave it entered, it not being a privileged motion.

Mr. HOLMAN. Is there anything in 'the rules that prevents the motion to lay on the table being made at the proper time, when the subject comes up for action?

The SPEAKER. There is not.

Mr. HOLMAN. Then of course there is no necessity for making the motion now.

The SPEAKER. When the subject comes up the motion can, of course, be made.