ments referred to the committee, with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. He also reported, and at the same time, a joint resolution upon the same subject.

The amendment and joint resolution having been severally read, the VicePresident (John C. Calhoun) declared that the last of them could not be in order until after the adoption of the first; and it was thereupon returned to the committee.

6. NOT COMPETENT FOR, to give AUTHORITY TO OTHER THAN ITS MEMBERS.

34th Cong., 3d sess.; J., pp. 347, 348.]

MARCH 3, 1857. The Senate having under consideration the sundry civil appropriation bill, and the question being on an amendment made by Mr. Benjamin.

The Congressional Globe, Thirty-fourth Congress, third session, pages 1099 and 1100, records the following:

"MR. BENJAMIN. I stated when I offered the amendment that I had the authority of the Committee on the Library, they having reported it last year, and this being but a repetition of the proposition which last year passed the Senate with but a single dissenting voice.

"MR. IVERSON. I rise to a point of order. The Chair decided yesterday that it was not competent for any member to propose an amendment to an appropriation bill without the authority of a committee of the Senate, and that no person except a member of the committee could make the proposition. The Senator from Louisiana is not a member of the Committee on the Library, and therefore it is not competent for him to propose the amendment.

"THE PRESIDENT pro tempore (Mr. Mason). The Chair does not know whether the Senator from Louisiana belongs to that committee or not. The rule of the Senate is, that an amendment is not in order unless moved by direction of a standing or select committee of the Senate, except in the other cases in which it is admissible. The Chair considers that it is not competent for a committee to give a direction to offer an amendment to any person but one of its own members."

The Chair then ruled that the amendment was not in order.

7. WHEN COMMITTEE IS FULL, MOTION TO ADD MEMBER IS NOT IN ORDER.

35th Cong., 2d sess.; J., pp. 44, 45.]

DECEMBER 13, 1858.

Mr. Broderick moved that his colleague (Mr. Gwin) be appointed on the Committee on Public Lands.

The President (Mr. Fitzpatrick in the chair) stated that, the committees being full, the motion was not in order.

8. WHEN COMMITTEE IS DISCHARGED, BILL COMES DIRECTLY BEFORE THE SENATE.

41st Cong., 2d sess.; J., p. 419.]

MARCH 28, 1870.

Mr. Sherman submitted a motion that the Committee on the Judiciary be discharged from the further consideration of the bill (H. R. 1536) to admit the State of Texas to representation in the Congress of the United States.

Ordered, That the consideration of the said motion be postponed to to-morrow.

MARCH 29, 1870.

Ib., J., pp. 424, 425.] Mr. Sherman moved that the present and all other orders be postponed to to-morrow for the purpose of enabling the Senate to proceed to the consideration of the motion yesterday submitted by him, to discharge the Committee on the Judiciary from the further consideration of the bill (H. R. 1536) to admit the State of Texas to representation in the Congress of the United States. After a division of the question, both branches passing in the affirmative it was

Ordered, That the Committee on the Judiciary be discharged from the further consideration of the bill (H. R. 1536), and thereupon the Senate proceeded to consider the said bill as in Committee of the Whole; and the bill having been amended on the motion of Mr. Sherman by striking out the last proviso, it was reported to the Senate, and the amendment was concurred in.

Ordered, That the amendment be engrossed and the bill read a third time. The said bill as amended was read the third time; and on the question shall the bill pass, it was determined in the affirmative; yeas 47, nays 11. (See Cong. Globe, pp. 2271, 2272.)

9. MOTION TO DISCHARGE, MUST LIE OVER ONE DAY ON OBJECTION. 42d Cong., 3d sess.; J., p. 98.] DECEMBER 20, 1872.

Mr. Windom submitted a motion that the Committee on Appropriations be discharged from the further consideration of the bill (H. R. 3131) making appropriations to supply deficiencies in the appropriations, etc., and asked that the Senate proceed to the present consideration of the motion.

Mr. Edmunds objected to the present consideration of the motion, and made the point of order that the motion of Mr. Windom, being in the nature of a resolution, must, under the twenty-sixth rule of the Senate, if its consideration be objected to, lie over one day for consideration.

The President pro tempore submitted the question of order to a decision of the Senate, viz: "Is it in order for the Senate to consider on the day it is submitted a motion to discharge a committee from the further consideraion of a bill?"

After debate, it was determined in the negative; yeas 22, nays 23. (See Cong. Globe, pp. 322-327.)

10. SUBJECTS RETURNED TO, HAVING THEM IN CHARGE AT PRECED. ING SPECIAL SESSION.

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

OCTOBER 18, 1877.

Mr. Thurman submitted a motion that Mr. J. B. Eustis be now sworn as a Senator from the State of Louisiana for the term expiring March 3, 1879. Mr. Conkling objected to the consideration of the motion, and raised the question of order, viz: That the credentials of Mr. Eustis having been referred to the Committee on Privileges and Elections at the last special session of the Senate and not having been reported upon, were not before the Senate, but still in the possession of the committee under the fifty-ninth rule, which prescribes that all subjects referred to committees and not reported upon at the close of a session of Congress shall be returned to the office of the Secretary, to be by him retained until the next session, when they shall be returned to the several committees.

The Vice-President (Mr. Wheeler) submitted the question of order to the Senate in the following words: "Shall all subjects referred to committees and

not reported upon at the close of the last preceding session of this body, in March last, and returned to the office of the Secretary of the Senate, be returned to the several committees to which they had previously been referred?" and It was determined in the affirmative. (See Cong. Record, pp. 107, 108.)

11. MOTION TO DISCHARGE, NOT IN ORDER IN MORNING HOUR. 56th Cong., 2d sess.; J., p. 234.]

FEBRUARY 28, 1901.

The President pro tempore (Mr. Frye) laid before the Senate the resolution submitted by Mr. Pettigrew on the 26th instant to discharge the Committee on Education and Labor from the further consideration of the bill (H. R. 6882) limiting hours of daily service of laborers and mechanics employed upon work done for the United States or any Territory or the District of Columbia, thereby securing better products, and for other purposes, and that the Senate proceed to consider the same.

Mr. Platt of Connecticut, raised a question of order, viz: That the consideration of the resolution was not in order during the morning hour; that it not only proposed to discharge the committee from the consideration of the bill, but to consider it on the same day, and therefore the resolution was not in order. The President pro tempore sustained the question of order, and decided that the resolution was not in order.

COMPENSATION OF SENATORS.

1. When it begins.

2. Where interested.

3. President pro tempore may be given extra .

1. WHEN IT BEGINS.

35th Cong., 1st sess.; J., pp. 441, 516.] 37th Cong., 2d sess.; J., p. 797.]

MAY 12-25, 1858.
JULY 11, 1862.

Minnesota was admitted as a State May 11, 1858, and the first Senators from that State appeared and took their seats May 12, 1858. June 3, the Committee on the Judiciary reported that their compensation should begin on the date of the admission of the State. In 1862 the question was again raised and the Committee on the Judiciary reported that the Senators from Minnesota were entitled to compensation from the beginning of the session in which the State was admitted. A joint resolution to this effect passed the Senate but failed in the House, whereupon the Senate paid the compensation from the beginning of the session from its contingent fund.

SENATORS FROM MONTANA, WASHINGTON, AND NORTH AND SOUTH DAKOTA, FROM THE DATE OF THE ADMISSION OF THEIR STATES.

SEPTEMBER 29, 1890.

51st Cong., 1st sess.; J., pp. 556–559.] Mr. Hoar, from the Committee on Privileges and Elections, who were instructed by a resolution of the Senate of June 23, 1890, to inquire as to the dates on which the pay of the Senators from the States of Montana, Washington, and North and South Dakota should commence, submitted a report (No. 1820), accompanied by the following resolution, for consideration:

Resolved, That, in the judgment of the Senate, the Senators from the newly admitted States of North Dakota, South Dakota, Montana, and Washington are entitled to receive their compensation as Senators from the date of the admission of their States.

Which was agreed to. (See Cong. Record, pp. 10672–10673.)

NOTE. The time or date when compensation to Senators began has not been uniform.

SENATORS FROM OKLAHOMA,

The State was admitted into the Union by the proclamation of the President November 16, 1907. The Senators were elected December 11, 1907, and sworn in December 16, 1908, but were paid from the date of their election.

The present law governing the time when compensation shall begin is as follows:

"That Senators elected, whose term of office begins on the fourth day of March, and whose credentials in due form of law shall have been presented in the Senate, but who have had no opportunity to be qualified, may receive

their compensation monthly, from the beginning of their term, until there shall be a session of the Senate. [22 Stats., p. 632.] Provided, That the salaries of Senators elected or appointed to fill vacancies in the Senate, and of Senators elected for a full term subsequent to the commencement of such term, shall commence on the date of their election or appointment." [28 Stats., p. 162.]

2. WHEN VOTING ON QUESTIONS IN WHICH THEY ARE INTERESTED. 40th Cong., 2d sess.; J., pp. 766, 767.]

JULY 25, 1868.

On motion by Mr. Conkling, the Senate proceeded to consider the resolution submitted by Mr. Trumbull on the 21st instant, directing the Secretary to pay to the Senators from Arkansas, Florida, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Louisiana their compensation from the commencement of the Fortieth Congress.

On motion by Mr. Davis, to amend the resolution by striking out all after the word "Arkansas" and inserting "the compensation allowed by law from the 22d day of June, 1868; and to the Senators from Florida, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Louisiana from the 25th day of June, 1868;" yeas and nays were ordered. The Secretary having finished calling the roll and before the result of the vote just taken was announced by the Chair,

Mr. Buckalew rose to a question of order, to wit: That it was against the rules and parliamentary law for a member of the body to vote upon a question in the result of which he was directly interested, and that some of the members of the Senate being directly interested in the present, had voted upon it; and that he raised a question of order on the votes so given.

The President pro tempore (Mr. Benjamin F. Wade) submitted the question of order to the Senate, viz: "Had the Senators upon whose votes the question of order was raised the right to vote upon the question before the Senate?" Pending debate thereon, a motion was made by Mr. Sumner that the Senate proceed to the consideration of executive business. Upon which motion Mr. Hendricks raised the following question of order: That, upon a question before the Senate upon which the yeas and nays had been ordered and the roll called by the Secretary and before the result was declared by the Chair, the motion of the Senator from Massachusetts to proceed to the consideration of executive business was not in order.

The President pro tempore overruled the point of order, and decided the motion of Mr. Sumner to be in order. On an appeal; yeas 15, nays 21.

So the decision of the Chair was not sustained.

The question recurring upon the question of order raised by Mr. Buckalew and submitted by the Chair to the decision of the Senate, a demand was made by Mr. Trumbull that the result of the vote on the amendment proposed by Mr. Davis be announced.

Several Senators were absent when the roll was called, who now appeared and expressed a wish to vote, and other Senators expressing a wish to change their votes, the Chair directed the Secretary to call the roll, when it appeared that on the question to agree to the amendment of Mr. Davis yeas were 25, nays 21.

The quesion of order raised by Mr. Buckalew and submitted by the Chair to the decision of the Senate again recurring, after debate, on motion of Mr. Frelinghuysen that the question of order lie on the table, it was determined in the affirmative. The resolution of Mr. Trumbull as amended by Mr. Davis was then agreed to. (See Cong. Globe, pp. 4453, 4457, 4458, 4459, 4461.)