of the Convention and of the galleries. No persons, excepting members, officers, and attachés of the Convention, and such persons as may be invited by the Convention, or by the President, shall be admitted within the bar of the Convention. The Chairman of each Committee of the Whole, during the sitting of such committee, shall have the like power of preserving order in the hall and in the galleries. Adopted.

Rule 10.-The Secretary must attend each day, and call the roll, read the Journal, and all propositions or resolutions. He shall have the direction of the Assistant Secretaries unless otherwise ordered. Adopted.

Rule 11.-The Assistant Secretaries must attend each day, take charge of all resolutions, propositions, petitions, memorials, and other papers presented to the Convention, file and enter the same in the books provided for that purpose, and perform such other duties as may be directed by the Secretary of the Convention.

ceedings of the Convention. Adopted.

Rule 13. The Journal Clerk must record each day's proceedings in the Journal, from which they must be read each day by the Secretary, and then be authenticated by the signature of the President. Adopted.

Rule 14.-The Sergeant-at-Arms must give a general supervision, under the direction of the President, to the hall of the Convention and rooms attached, attend during the sittings of the Convention, execute its commands and all process issued by its authority, keep an account of pay and mileage of members, attachés and employés, and prepare checks for the same.

MR. FREEMAN. I would like to inquire about this expression," and prepare checks for the same."

THE CHAIR. Warrants, I suppose.

MR. EDGERTON. That rule is almost in the language of the rule of the Assembly. I suppose the Sergeant-at-Arms gives the check to the Controller of State to draw the warrant. There are other rules here. There is a rule which provides that there is no pay in some cases to be allowed; that persons who are absent on business, except committee duty, or sickness, shall not have any pay at all. The Sergeant-at-Arms keeps the accounts and gives a statement to the Controller of State. It will be found in the Assembly rule. I think it is also in that section of the Code regulating the duties of the Sergeants-at-Arms of the Senate and Assembly.

MR. FREEMAN. I cannot see any meaning in the words. I move to strike out the words "and prepare checks for the same."

MR. EDGERTON. The words “prepare checks” are copied from

the Code.

MR. ESTEE. Because the Controller has to have a voucher in order to settle with the State.

THE CHAIR. I am informed by the Sergeant-at-Arms that the payroll is already printed and he has only to fill them out. The motion was lost.

MR. FILCHER. I move to insert in place of "prepared checks for the" the words "receipt for warrants for the."

MR. EDGERTON. Every gentleman has to receipt for his warrant when he draws it. This is an authority for the Controller of State to draw his warrant. It is proper as it stands.

The motion was lost.

MR. HERRINGTON. I think it would be satisfactory to the members to strike out the words "and prepare checks for the same," and insert "and fill up the pay-rolls of meinbers for the Controller."

MR. EDGERTON. The Sergeant-at-Arms keeps the pay-roll, and the Controller acts independent of the pay-roll. I hope the motion will not prevail.

MR. HUESTIS. Would a motion to strike out and insert be in order? I move to insert as follows: "and prepare for the Controller of State a pay-roll of members and attachés of this Convention." The motion was lost and the rule adopted,

Rule 15. The Assistant Sergeant-at-Arms must attend the sittings of the Convention each day, prohibit all persons except members, officers, and employés, and such other persons as may have the privilege of the floor assigned them by the Rules of the Convention, from entering within the bar unless upon invitation, and keep order in the halls, lobbies, and galleries.

Adopted.

Rule 17.-Order of Business.-1. Roll call. 2. Reading and approval of the Journal. 3. Presentation of petitions and memorials; under which head shall be included remonstrances, communications from individuals and public bodies. 4. Communications from State officers; under which head shall be embraced, also, communications from public officers, and from corporations in response to calls for information. 5. Reports of standing committees, in the order in which they stand in the rules. 6. Reports of select committees. 7. Introduction of resolutions and propositions relating to the Constitution. 8. Unfinished business. 9. Special orders. 10. General order. 11. Miscellaneous

motions and resolutions.

MR. SHAFTER. move to strike out of the fourth clause the words "in response to calls for information."

MR. LARKIN. I deem this one of the most important provisions in this rule. This Convention should have the power at any time to call

for information from any corporation. It may be very important for us to ascertain some things.

MR. SHAFTER. That rule excludes any communication from corporations, except those that are made in response to a call for information. I want them all, either voluntary or otherwise, made subject to that order of business. As it is now they are excluded entirely.

MR. WYATT. I hope, Mr. President, that the fourth clause, under discussion, will not be stricken out. It will certainly be competent for this Convention to receive any and all proper communications from State officers, corporations, or any body or individual, and it will be the highest privilege and pleasure of the Convention to do so; but we certainly ought to have a rule by which we assert our authority, by which we intend to claim the authority, and by which we intend to exercise the authority of gaining information from State officers, from corporate bodies, or from any other body within the jurisdiction of the State of California. I hope, therefore, that the fourth clause of the rule under consideration will not be stricken out.

the scope and purpose of the amendment. Now the clause as it reads is,

MR. MCFARLAND. I do not think that the Convention apprehends

"and from corporations in response to calls for information." Now, if you allow that clause to stand, you say, virtually, that a corporation shall not communicate with this Convention unless in response to a call for information.

MR. EDGERTON. The third order of business is the presentation of petitions and memorials. Now, any individual, or any corporation, can communicate with this Convention under that head.

MR. MCFARLAND. From individuals and public bodies; it seems to me that it would exclude corporations, and that the fourth clause would be construed to mean that the corporations should not be allowed to communicate at all, except in response to calls for information. If you strike out these words, we can receive communications whether demanded or not. If any gentleman desires any information, of course by calling for it, he can get it. But it seems to me that if you leave these words in, we say in effect that we shall not receive any communications from corporations unless upon a call for information. Therefore I am in favor of the motion to strike out. MR. SHAFTER. If the amendment is construed in this way, I ask leave to withdraw it.

Leave was granted, and the amendment withdrawn.
The resolution was then adopted.

Rule 18.-When a question is under debate, or before the Convention, no motion shall be received but: 1. To adjourn. 2. To lay on the table. 3. For the previous question. 4. To postpone to a day certain. 5. To commit or amend. 6. To postpone indefinitely. Which several motions shall have precedence in the order in which they are named; but the first three shall be decided without debate; and no motion to postpone to a day certain, to commit, or to postpone indefinitely, being decided, shall again be allowed on the same day, and at the same stage of the proceedings. MR. FREEMAN. I see that in the latter part of this rule certain motions are spoken of. This last clause seems to be ambiguous. I therefore move to strike out "and at the same stage of the proceedings." MR. EDGERTON. That rule was adopted from the rule of the Assembly of California. The committee thought that it was not proper that it should come up again at the same stage of the proceedings, but upon further deliberation, at some other hour of the day, it might be deemed advisable to take it up again.

The motion to strike out was lost, and the rule adopted.

Rule 19.-All questions relating to the priority of business shall be decided without debate.

Adopted.

Rule 20.-When a motion is made to refer any subject, and different committees should be proposed, the question shall be taken in the following order:

1. The Committee of the Whole Convention.
2. A Standing Committee.
3. A Select Committee.

Every committee of the Convention to whom a resolution or proposition has been referred shall report the same to the Convention within fifteen days from the time it is received by the Chairman of the committee, unless further time to report is granted, unless otherwise ordered by the Convention. Every proposition or resolution shall be referred to the appropriate standing committees as indicated by its name given

herein.

Adopted.

Rule 21.-Any member may call for the division of a question when the sense will admit of it. A motion to strike out shall be deemed indivisible; but a motion to strike out being lost, shall neither preclude amendment nor a motion to strike out and insert.

MR. BARTON. I move to amend by inserting the following: "Provided, that in no case when the ayes and noes are called shall any two members of this Convention be permitted to pair off."

MR. EDGERTON. I rise to a point of order. That is not germane.
THE CHAIR. The point of order is well taken.
The rule was adopted.

Rule 22.-Upon a call of the Convention the names of the members shall be called over by the Secretary and the absentees noted; after which the names of the absentees shall again be called over. The doors shall then be shut, and those for whom no sufficient excuses are made may, by order of those present, be taken into custody as they appear, or may be sent for and taken into custody wherever found by the Sergeantat-Arms, or by a special messenger, to be appointed for that purpose.

MR. STEDMAN. I move that the following be prefixed to the rule: "Any three members have a right to demand a call of the Convention, but if any objection be made the demand shall be sustained by one fifth of the members present and."

MR. EDGERTON. I think, perhaps, that the gentleman does not know that a call of the Convention cannot be had except by a majority vote of those present. A call of the Convention is never had except by a majority vote of the Convention or house itself. I hope the gentleman will withdraw his motion.

MR. STEDMAN. I must differ with the gentleman from Sacramento. The Ohio Convention, from which I get that rule, was a body with one hundred and five members. Now I understand that any member can order a call of the house, no matter if there is not a majority present, no matter if certain members are present, if there is any body that three members can call for a call of the house. That is the reason that I have offered this, in order that it can be done by any three members at any time.

MR. WATERS. Under the rules that we have, it does seem to me that any gentleman may move a call of the house. Any gentleman nay second the motion. The motion will then be put, and if a majority vote for the call of the house, it is ordered. The rule that the gentleman annoued was more strict even than ours. There a certain number had to move before a call could be voted on. As we have it here, if we find at any time our quorum is growing small, any gentleman may move for a call of the house. He gets a second to the motion, and the motion is put by the Chair. If a majority vote for it, the call is ordered. Then this rule comes into play. It seems to me that there is no amendment necessary to this rule.

MR. STEDMAN. I withdraw it.

shall have entered the Convention after the calling of the roll is finished." I do not think any gentleman here ought to be permitted to leave the Convention and speculate upon results and then come in and vote. There is another general rule that any of these rules may be temporarily suspended by a two-third vote, and there is no danger of injustice being done. MR. MCCALLUM. I withdraw my motion. MR. MORSE'S amendment was lost.

MR. STEDMAN. I move to amend rule twenty-five by adding the following words: "All members of this Convention must vote on every question, unless a sufficient excuse, to be accepted by the Convention, be given." MR. EDGERTON. I rise to a point of order. My point is that it is not germane to the subject-matter. MR. ESTEE. I am in favor of embodying that rule somewhere, but I do not think this is the proper place for it. I suggest to the gentleman that he withdraw it, and have it placed in a separate rule. MR. STEDMAN. I will withdraw it.

MR. LAINE. I would like to inquire of the Chairman of the Committee on Rules in regard to the meaning of the first clause of this rule. It reads: "No member shall be allowed to explain his vote or discuss the question while the ayes and noes are being called."

MR. ESTEE. We understand it to be this: after the first name is called that no business can intervene, but that any member, when he rises to vote, of course, by leave of the house, can make an explanation.

The motion prevailed and the rule was adopted.

Rule 23.-Upon a division or count of the Convention on any question, no person without the bar shall be counted. Adopted.

Rule 24.-On all questions and motions whatsoever, the President shall take the sense of the Convention by ayes and noes, provided five members present shall so require it. When the ayes and noes are taken no member shall be allowed to vote who shall have entered the Convention after the calling of the roll is finished. The names of members shall be called in alphabetical order; provided further, that on all resolutions and propositions relating to the Constitution, the final vote shall be taken by ayes and noes.

Adopted.

Rule 25.-No member shall be allowed to explain his vote or discuss the question while the ayes and noes are being called; and no member shall be allowed to change his vote after the vote is announced from

the Chair.

MR. BARTON. I believe that my amendment would apply to this rule. I, therefore, move to amend by inserting "provided that in no case where the ayes and noes are called shall any two members of this Convention be permitted to pair off."

THE SECRETARY. Where is it to be put in?

MR. EDGERTON. Let it be put in where it ought to be and then vote it down.

The amendment was lost.

MR. MORSE. I move to amend rule twenty-four by inserting after the word "finished," in the fifth line, the words "nor shall a member be entitled to vote unless he is in his seat."

MR. ESTEE. I hope this amendment will not be adopted. Sometimes it is a matter of convenience for a member to be in another part of the hall, and if he is not interfering with the work of the Convention, I see no reason why he should be deprived of his vote.

MR. CROSS. It seems to me that there is good reason for requiring members to vote from their seats. It is the only way the Secretary can tell whether the person answering is the person entitled to vote. Now, during the past few days members have been answering to other members' names. A mistake is very easily discovered and corrected where a member is required to vote from his seat. An absent member's name has been voted here.

MR. MORSE. I offered the amendment for the very reason stated by the gentleman from Nevada, Mr. Cross. I think I have noticed members vote sometimes at a distance from their places, and it is difficult for the Secretary to tell whether a gentleman has voted, or whether somebody else voted by mistake. I think the member voting should be in his seat.

MR. LARKIN. I regret very much to differ with my friend, Mr. Morse, upon this question. I might desire to vote upon a measure, and I believe that the Secretary will soon ascertain whether the person voting is the proper voting person. I don't think that the lobby is going to get in here and vote for us. I don't think we ought to be compelled to sit in our seats during a session of ten or twelve hours. If members should desire to stand at the side, or anywhere within the rail, they should be entitled to vote. If he is within the rail he should be entitled to vote. MR. MCCALLUM. I wish to offer another amendment. There is no doubt but that the Secretary can tell who votes, by their personal appearance, and by their voices. I propose this amendment: after the word "finished" insert "except by consent of the Convention." As this reads, no member coming in after the roll has been called, this long roll of one hundred and fifty members, can vote at all, under any cir

MR. MCCALLUM. By consent of the Convention. I ask to insert the words "except by consent of the Convention." That is, not after the result has been announced; that would be too late, I admit, but after the roll is finished, and the result not announced, a member coming in ought to be permitted to vote.

MR. EDGERTON. I hope that the suggestion of the gentleman from Alameda, Mr. McCallum, will not prevail. The rule reads: "When the ayes and noes are taken no member shall be allowed to vote who

rising to speak upon any question, and if he explains his vote he must confine himself to the explanation.

Rule twenty-five was adopted.

Rule 26.-It shall be the duty of each member who moves that any committee be instructed to inquire into the expediency of amending or revising the existing Constitution, to point out the amendment which he deems expedient, in writing, to accompany his motion. MR. WYATT. I hope the gentleman will explain what is meant by that rule.

MR. ESTEE. I would ask the gentleman to state in what respect. It seem to me to be plain language. "It shall be the duty of each member who moves that any committee be instructed to inquire into the expediency of amending or revising the existing Constitution, to point out the amendment which he deems expedient, in writing, to accompany his motion." The proposition is this, Mr. President: A gentleman may feel a deep interest in the question of taxation. duces a resolution that the Committee on Taxation report to this Convention a certain section declaring that mortgages shall be taxed, for instance, and the object of this rule is that the gentleman shall embody in his resolution the identical instructions to be conveyed to the committee, so that the committee shall fully understand the wish of the

house.

The rule was adopted.

He intro

Rule 27.-Motions and reports may be committed or recommitted at the pleasure of the Convention, and with or without instructions from the Convention. Adopted.

Rule 28.-No motion or proposition of a subject different from that under consideration shall be admitted under color of amendment. MR. HERRINGTON. I move to strike out the word " of" and insert the word "on" after the word "proposition."

MR. EDGERTON. The rule is right as it is. The proposition is of a subject, not on a subject.

The amendment was lost.

MR. MCCALLUM. I move to amend by adding after the word "amendment" the words "or substitute."

MR. ESTEE. There is no substitute in the rules.
THE CHAIR. Rule thirty-two makes a substitute an amendment.
MR. MCCALLUM. I withdraw the amendment.

MR. WATERS. I rise to a point of order. It is twelve o'clock. Under the rule that has been adopted, the Convention must take a

recess until one P. M.

THE CHAIR. The point of order is well taken. The Convention will take a recess until one P. M.

AFTERNOON SESSION.

The Convention reassembled at one o'clock. Mr. Murphy in the chair. Roll call dispensed with.

MR. BIGGS. I think the roll should be called.
THE CHAIR. Does the gentleman insist upon the roll.

MR. BIGGS. I move that the absentees of this morning be called. THE CHAIR. I will suggest if there are any absentees in the hall, they will rise and be recorded. The question is upon the adoption of rule twenty-nine.

MR. ESTEE. Before passing to rule twenty-nine, I understood we were considering rule twenty-eight, when we took a recess. THE CHAIR. Rule twenty-eight was adopted-no, it was not adopted. The question was on the adoption of rule twenty-eight. MR. ESTEE. I move to amend by striking out the words "motion or proposition of a."

The motion prevailed, and the rule, as amended, was adopted. Rule 29.-A motion may be withdrawn, by leave of the Convention, at any time before amendment or decision. Adopted.

Rule 30.-A motion to adjourn shall always be in order. The Secretary shall enter on the minutes the name of any member moving an adjournment, and, also, the hour at which the motion is made. MR. TINNIN. I move to strike out the word "Secretary," and insert "Minute Clerk." The Secretary has nothing to do with it. THE CHAIR. No objection, the correction will be made.

MR. MCCALLUM. I move to amend rule thirty, by inserting after the word "order" in the first line, the words, "and shall be decided without debate."

Mr. SWING. I think rule eighteen covers this same ground.
The amendment was rejected, and the rule adopted.

Rule 31. No motion shall be debated until the same shall be seconded and distinctly announced by the President; and it shall be reduced to writing, if desired by the President or any member, and shall be read by the Secretary, before the same shall be debated.

Adopted.

Rule 32.-A substitute shall be deemed an amendment, and be treated in all respects as such.

MR. MCCALLUM. Mr. Chairman: I don't rise for the purpose of offering an amendment to the rule, but to ask the Chairman of the committee if I am right in my construction of it: "A substitute shall be deemed an amendment, and be treated in all respects as such." Then, all substitutes are to be treated as amendments; in other words, substitutes are not to be entertained in any case. That will do away with substitutes entirely. Now, if I understand the law properly, an amendment to an amendment to an amendment is not in order. But a substitute for a pending resolution, and the amendment to that resolution, is in order, and the resolution and its amendment may be superseded by a substitute. I am not in favor of this radical innovation. If a resolution is presented, to which an amendment is offered, and the Convention is opposed to the whole theory of the proposition, the most expeditious way to dispose of it, is to adopt a substitute for the whole thing, and then use the substitute as a basis of action.

MR. TINNIN. I rise to a point of order. The gentleman has not offered any amendment.

THE CHAIR. The point of order is well taken. MR. MCCALLUM. I am speaking against the resolution itself. Now, I move now, Mr. President, that this substitute be recommittedthat this rule thirty-two be recommitted to the Committee on Rules, and I ask this Convention whether it is prepared to dispense entirely with the practice of legislative bodies of using substitutes. I say it is a convenient and practical mode of arriving at the sense of the majority of the Convention; much more expeditious than the mode here proposed MR. TINNIN. In answer to the gentleman, and for his information, I will state that this rule has governed the legislative bodies of this State for a good many years, and as a general thing I think it has worked well, and given general satisfaction.

MR. ESTEE. This rule was interposed to do away with the question as to whether it was possible to have a substitute that was not an amendment in itself; and second, because it was not thought wise that there should be four questions pending before the house at one time. Now, sir, there can be the original question, and there can be the first and second amendments, and then there would be a substitute besides. That would be four. Now, we propose to treat a substitute as an amendment, and there will be but three questions before the house, and if the gentleman wants to reach the sense of the house by adopting any new proposition, he can refer it to a committee with instructions, and in half a dozen different ways, that are familiar to him. I trust this rule, of all others, will be adopted, as it will be found to facilitate the business of this body. You will find, by and by, in considering these amendments, the different members jumping up and proposing this amendment and that amendment, and we will get very much mixed, and if you will treat these substitutes as amendments, then there never can be any confusion. Then there will be the main question, the amendment, and the amendment to the amendment, and those three questions are familiar to all persons on this floor. I hope, for the sake of simplifying matters, the rule will be adopted. It has been the rule in our legislative assemblies for a number of years, and it has worked well.

MR. WATERS. I will state that under this rule we may have two amendments. One of these amendments, or both of them, may be substitutes. We call them amendments, although they may be substitutes. Now, the committee have recommended this rule so that there cannot be so many motions pending at one time. It cuts off the possibility of there being four or five questions before the house at one time.

MR. CROSS. Mr. President: It seems to me if we adopt this rule as it reads, it will in a great measure do away with the real benefits arising from the use of substitutes. It was illustrated yesterday, when one gentleman offered a resolution that "A" be appointed Doorkeeper. Now, if this rule is adopted, another gentleman might amend by making the salary fifty dollars a month, and another might amend the amendment by making it thirty dollars a month. Now, under this rule, if another member wants to move that "B" be appointed Doorkeeper instead of "A," before that can be done we will have to take three separate votes; vote the amendment to the amendment down, and then vote the amendment down, and then vote the original resolution down, and then take up the resolution to appoint "B" Doorkeeper. Now when there are three such motions before the house, the whole business can be closed out at one stroke, and that stroke is the substitute. That is the advantage which a substitute has; it enables us to arrive at the sense of the Convention by a single vote, and I think we should adhere to the principle of the substitute. A substitute, by one vote, can take the place of three or four.

MR. MCCALLUM. Suppose this to be the case. Suppose an amendment to the Constitution is proposed, the whole theory of the proposition the majority of this Convention are opposed to. An amendment is offered, and an amendment to the amendment; so far you can go with amendments; but the third amendment, which would be a substitute, would be ruled out of order, because, as has been suggested, you can't propose an amendment to an amendment to an amendment. Now, we will suppose that all the time it is clearly the judgment of the Convention that the whole proposition is the wrong basis of action. Now, the matter being an important one, the roll is called. We have to call the

roll on amendment one and on amendment two, and spend all that time calling the roll twice, whereas, if the Convention can have the opportunity, it can vote on a substitute to take the place of the original motion. I know that many innovations have been made in the customs, but whether wisely made or not, I cannot say, but as far as my own judgment is concerned, I think not. I don't believe but what, with the intelligence of this Convention, they will be able to keep the run of even four propositions the resolution, the amendment, the amendment to the amendment, and the substitute-for in that case, without this rule, the first question will be on the adoption of the amendment, which will take the place of the resolution and the two amendments, whichever is in accordance with the will of the majority of the Convention. The question in that case is on the substitute.

MR. WATERS. It does seem to me that the logic of the gentleman is entirely out of the way. He is presuming that the substitute, or in other words, that the last motion to be put is always right, and that the substitute will always represent the wishes of the majority of the Convention. If the rule is to allow four or five amendments, he is presuming that the last one is always going to be the best. If we limit it to two amendments the matter can be reached just as quickly as the other way. There is no reason to presume that the last amendment offered, if we allow four or five, is going to be the best one. Let us limit the number, and then we can keep straight and know what we are doing.

MR. WEST. I am not at all particular whether this section is adopted or not. I am clearly of the opinion that the committee intended to shorten the process in this Convention by the adoption of that rule. Now it is well known by gentlemen of experience in parliamentary law that there are four propositions, the original, the amendment, the amendment to the amendment, and the substitute. It is an established rule of parliamentary usage that the mover of the original proposition, and the friends of the original proposition, should have the benefit of all the amendments; in other words, that the friends have the privilege of amending the original proposition, and putting it in the best light possible. Then if a member offers a substitute the two propositions come up on their respective merits. Now, your committee endeavored to shorten and simplify matters as much as possible.

MR. HERRINGTON. It occurs to me that these two rules, twentynine and thirty-two, taken together, solve this problem. "A substitute shall be deemed an amendment and be treated in all respects as such.” Then rule twenty-eight: "No subject different from that under consideration shall be admitted under color of an amendment." That does away entirely with any such thing as a substitute, and makes a substitute actually an amendment, because it must pertain to the same subject. MR. ROLFE. I am in favor of adopting the rule as originally recommended by the committee. I call the gentleman's attention to rule twenty-eight, which says: No subject different from that under consideration shall be admitted under color of an amendment." Now, unless a substitute is treated as an amendment, why any gentleman might get up here and move that when this Convention adjourn it do adjourn until next Monday. Another gentleman might get up and move as a substitute that this Convention appoint an additional Page. Now, if a substitute is not treated as an amendment-and I will confess right here that I have had no experience in parliamentary law, never was in a legislative body in my life-but it does seem to me that unless a substitute is treated as an amendment a man may make an amendment to a motion, another may offer an amendment to the amendment, then another gentleman rises and makes a motion, or offers something as a substitute to the whole thing, and then another gentleman will move an amendment to the substitute, and another will get up and move an amendment to the amendment to the substitute, and thus we will have about six propositions before the Convention at one time. If gentlemen want so many propositions to be entertained, let them amend the rule so that an amendment to an amendment to an amendment may be entertained. Let them do it directly, and not try to accomplish it in this roundabout way. I am in favor of the rule as it stands. MR. WELLIN. I move to strike out the rule entirely. MR. DUDLEY, of Solano. I move to strike out the rule under consideration and insert the following:

THE CHAIR. There is a motion before the house to recommit this to the Committee on Rules.

The motion to recommit was lost.

The question being on a motion to strike out, it was lost.

MR. DUDLEY, of Solano. I offer an amendment. "A substitute shall be in order, but shall not take precedence of pending amendments; but after all pending amendments have been acted upon, the substitute shall take precedence of the original motion." MR. ESTEE. That defeats the very object of the rule. The amendment was rejected.

The question being on the adoption of the rule, it was adopted. Rule 33.-The previous question shall only be put when demanded by five members.

Adopted.

Rule 34.-All incidental questions of order arising after a motion is made for the previous question, shall be decided, whether on appeal or otherwise, without debate.

Adopted.

Rule 35.-The previous question shall be put in the following form: "Shall the main question be now put?" and all debate upon the main question shall be suspended until the previous question shall be decided. After the adoption of the previous question, the sense of the Convention shall forthwith be taken upon original amendments reported by a committee, upon pending amendments, and then upon the main question, without debate.

MR. ESTEE. I move to amend so that it will read, "after the adoption of the previous question the sense of the Convention shall forthwith be taken: first, upon original amendments reported by a

The motion prevailed, and the rule as amended was adopted. Rule 36.-When a question is indefinitely postponed, the same shall not be again introduced during the session of the Convention.

MR. MCFARLAND. I don't know that I understand the purport of that rule: "When a question is indefinitely postponed, the same shall not be again introduced during the session of the Convention." Now, sir, I understand that this Convention, at the last moment, at any time, may take any action it pleases upon any proposition that has been presented. I do not understand that if it votes one way to-day it cannot vote another way to-morrow. Is the majority of the Convention to be bound hand and foot because a question has been indefinitely postponed? If it is, I am not in favor of any such rule.

MR. ESTEE. The purpose seems to be very clear. It is that when a question is brought before this body for discussion and disposition, and is disposed of by indefinite postponement, it cannot be brought before the body again during this session, unless by suspending the rules. Now, any one of these rules can be suspended by a two-thirds vote, and if at any period it shall be found that we have made a mistake, you can certainly get two thirds of this Convention to agree to suspend the rules. The object is to facilitate business, and I hope the rule will be adopted. MR. WHITE. I move to insert the words "without the consent of the Convention." MR. MCFARLAND. Now the explanation given by the Chairman satisfies me that we ought not to adopt this rule. He says the rules may be suspended by a two-thirds vote. Now, suppose a majority of this Convention vote to-day to indefinitely postpone a proposition, and suppose next week, or next month, after further consideration, the majority are in favor of the same proposition. According to the gentleman's motion you cannot act upon it again unless you can get a twothirds vote. I say it is not right. I think we ought to be open to the last moment to conviction and reason. If I should vote to-day against a measure, and to-morrow I should become convinced that I was wrong. I should want the privilege of voting the other way, and the majority should be allowed to undo what it has done at any time. In that way the minority would be able to control the majority and I say it is not right. It seems to me to be a very dangerous precedent to establish. I do not understand that you can bind this Convention in any way; I understand that the majority can do as they please. I am opposed to this rule. MR. BARBOUR. I am opposed to this rule, and still more opposed to it after hearing the explanations of the gentleman from San Francisco. He says, after a question has been fuily discussed and is indefinitely postponed, that it is permanently disposed of. Now, sir, I should like to know how it follows that a question can be discussed before it can be postponed. It seems to me that with this rule the minority might gag the majority, unless the Convention could muster a twothirds vote to take it up again after it has been indefinitely postponed, and I am opposed to any such gag rule as this. It seems to me the majority should always be able to take up a question, and I am opposed to the motion. We have rule eighteen, which provides what shall be done in such a case: that is that a question shall not be taken up again on the same day, at the same stage of the proceedings. Now it seems to me if there is a disposition to cut off debate and gag this Convention, this rule will do it, and I am opposed to it.

MR. HEUSTIS. I don't think the gentleman's point is well taken. I think it is nothing mo more than right that if this Convention to-day should arrive at a conclusion upon some proposition to be embodied in the Constitution, and in three weeks hence it clearly appeared to them that they were wrong in the first instance, they should have the right, by a majority vote, to undo what they had done and reverse their former action. MR. SHOEMAKER. The rule, as it stands now, is very old. We find it in Jefferson's Manual, page one hundred and forty-four. There is no gag about it. MR. MCFARLAND. I am very sorry that in making a set of rules, party questions should be sprung here. I have no idea that this rule was ever intended to gag any member or any number of members in this Convention, but I am opposed to the adoption of the rule on principle. I understand a Convention of this kind to be very different from a Legislature. The Legislature does its work every two years. If any wrong is done it can be remedied within two years. A Constitutional Convention does its work for a generation. I do not apprehend that any clause can be put in the Constitution which we intend to submit to the people, unless the majority is in favor of it; but I do not believe that any clause the majority wants to put in there ought to be kept out by the minority, and I do not believe that the majority are going to be bound up with a rule like that. Now, there are a number of questions to come up here, upon which I have no decided opinion at present; I desire to hear the reasoning and views of others. Now, a proposition may be brought up here, and without discussion may be indefinitely postponed, and be forgotten. Afterwards, it may become apparent that such a proposition proper, and then a minority of the Convention can prevent it. This is the direct effect of the rule. I understand that such a rule as this is common in legislative bodies. I do not know whether such is the case or not. But there is no comparison between the two bodies. The majority of this Convention, if they make a mistake, should be able to get right at any moment. MR. CAMPBELL. MR. President: These rules are for the future government of this Convention. As has well been said by the gentleman from Sacramento, Mr. McFarland, this is no ordinary legislative body. We should have the utmost freedom in the consideration of all questions relating to the organic law, and it would be unjust to the people of this State-it would be unreasonable in the extreme-if at some time when there is a thin house, a proposition by a bare majority vote should be indefinitely postponed, to say in our rules, that at some future time a majority of the whole Convention could not call it up again and reopen the subject. It seems to me that the amendment offered by Mr. Heustis exactly meets the case. Let the question be considered as disposed of unless the Convention, by a majority vote, sees fit to do otherwise.

MR. HAGER. Mr. President: In the first place, it is well enough to ascertain what the question is, as we all know it is not a new one. Now, this rule is as old as legislative assemblies themselves. It is recorded in Jefferson's Manual, which is nearly one hundred years old. I make these remarks merely because gentlemen have got up here and picked flaws at the committee, as if there was some intention to interfere with the rights of the majority. Some gentlemen seem to think that they are more holy than others, and I regret that these remarks have been made on this floor, and I hope that discipline will be enforced against those members who are constantly making these flings. This rule, whether good or not, is an old rule, and I will refer to Jefferson's Manual to corroborate what I say:

tions, so adapted as will enable them to dispose of every proposition that may come "It is proper that every deliberative assembly should have certain forms of quesup. They are-first, the previous question; second, to postpone indefinitely; third, to adjourn to a definite day; fourth, to lie on the table; fifth, to commit; and, sixth, to amend."

MR. BARBOUR. Suppose a motion to postpone is made, and suppose the previous question is immediately moved, what are you going to do about it?

MR. ESTEE. If the gentleman would take the trouble to study parliamentary law a little, he would have some idea of these things. If this rule is not adopted there will be no end to the debate. A question will be indefinitely postponed to-day, and to-morrow it will be brought up again and a long debate will again ensue, and the next day the same thing over again. This rule was intended to be in the interest of the business of the Convention and not as a gag. MR. RINGGOLD. This is a gag law, sir, and strikes directly at the minority, and I hope the minority will be wise enough to defeat it. MR. HERRINGTON. I move to amend by inserting after the the word "question," in line one, the following: "other than such as lates to the Constitution directly," so as to read, "When a question, other than such as relates to the Constitution directly," etc. MR. HEUSTIS. I move to amend by adding "except by a majority vote." It seems to me that this is right and proper.

MR. FILCHER. I raise the point of order that anything can be done

MR. BEERSTECHER. Mr. President: I must say that I agree with