PAIRED.

SIMPLE RESOLUTION.

vote

By Senator Weinert by unanimous consent:

Whereas, the good people of Texas are taking a keen interest in the question of prison reform, and

Whereas, there are now pending before this Legislature many bills on this important subject, and

Whereas, the members of this Legislature are anxious and desirous of all data and intelligent information on the subject, and

Whereas, we are advised that Hon. Amos W. Butler, President of the American Prison Association, a criminalist of international reputation, will be in the city of Austin on the 22nd, 23rd and 24th inst.

Therefore, be it Resolved by the Senate, That the honorable gentleman be invited to address the Senate on the night of January 23rd at 8 p. m., and that the members of the House be invited to attend.

PENDING BUSINESS.

Action recurred on the pending business, which was the point of order by Senator Meachum on the resolution by Senator Cofer (see former proceedings for resolution and point of order).

The Chair, President Pro Tem. Hudspeth, sustained the point of order. Following is the ruling:

The Senator from Cooke offered the following resolution:

"Resolved, That the vote of the Senate by which the rules of the Senate of the Thirty-first Legislature was adopted as the temporary rules of the present Senate be rescinded." Upon that motion the Senator from Grimes raised the point of order that under Rule 63, no standing rule could be suspended or changed without giving one day's notice.

"No standing rule or order of the Senate shall be rescinded or changed without one day's notice being given of the motion therefor."

To the mind of the Chair, this rule absolutely inhibits any change whatever in the rules without first giving to the Senate one day's notice of said proposed change.

If the motion of the Senator from Cooke was adopted, it would bring about a rescision of the resolution, providing that the rules of the Thirtyfirst Senate should govern until the Committee on Rules made its report, leaving the Senate without rules under which to proceed.

In the opinion of the Chair, the proper procedure would have been to instruct the Committee on Rules to bring in their report, said report lying over one day, as provided in the rules for changes in the rules, and could then have been taken up as the Senate rules provide.

The Chair cannot find and has made a diligent research where any parliamentary body has ever changed its rule in the twinkling of an eye or by a magic as it were.

If the motion of the Senator from Cooke is adopted, in the judgment of the Chair, it would abrogate all rules of the Senate and the rules governing the proceedings of the Senate would at once be just what the will of the majority should desire, and in the opinion of the Chair, there would be no need for printed rules governing procedure herein whatever.

of

The Chair can see no imperative necessity at this juncture for revolutionary proceedings in matters legislation by this body, and while the Chair may be in error, he does not propose by his ruling, to sanction the abrogation of a rule, the tenure of which runneth back in legislative proceedings in this State to where the memory of man runneth not to the contrary.

The Chair, in making this decision, does so without regard to whether it comes from the anti or the pro side of this chamber, but shall make same with an eye single to deliverative procedure and shall at all times

Nays-11.

Murray.. Paulus. Peeler.

Terrell, McLennan. Watson.

Absent.

PAIRED.

Senator Willacy (present), who would vote "nay," with Senator Perkins (absent), who would vote "yea."

Senator Weinert (present), who would vote "nay," with Senator Greer (absent), who would vote "yea."

Senator Meachum made the point of order that it required a two-thirds vote to adopt the resolution, contending that a motion to rescind the vote was in effect the suspending of the rules of the Senate, citing that part of Rule 61, page 12, which reads, "To suspend any rule of the Senate."

The Chair, Pres. Pro Tem. Hudspeth, sustained the point of order.

Senator Cofer appealed from the ruling of the Chair.

Senator Collins was called to the Chair and presided.

Question-Shall the Chair be sus

tained?

The Senate refused to sustain the Chair by the following vote:

PAIRED.

Senator Weinert (present), who would vote "yea," with Senator Greer (absent), who would vote "nay."

Action then recurred on the resolution by Senator Cofer, Pres. Pro Tem. Hudspeth resuming the Chair. The vote on the resolution resulted as follows:

Cofer.

Collins.

Johnson.

Sturgeon.

Terrell, Wise.

Townsend.

Vaughan.

PAIRED.

Senator Willacy (present), who would vote "yea," with Senator Perkins (absent), who would vote "nay." Senator Weinert (present), who would vote "yea," with Senator Greer (absent), who would vote "nay."

Add after Rule 6, the following Rule 6-a:

The Senate having overruled the Chair, the resolution was declared adopted, President Pro Tem. peth resuming the chair.

SIMPLE RESOLUTION. Senator Cofer offered the following resolution:

Resolved, That the rules of the Thirty-first Senate be adopted as the permanent rules of the Thirty-second

put such question to the Senate or fails to recognize any Senator to demand that a point of order under discussion be immediately decided, or fails to put the question, if seconded by ten Senators, 'Shall the point of order be now decided,' such Senator so offending shall be deemed guilty of violating the high privileges of the Senate, and the members thereof, and shall be in contempt of the Senate, and until such offending Senator shall purge himself of such contempt and be excused by the Senate, he shall not again be called to the chair during the Session. If such Senator so presiding shall refuse to recognize any Senator when addressed in prop er order, or to entertain the motion, point of order, or appeal of any Senator, or to pass upon the same, or to recognize a Senator to make the demand when seconded by ten Senators that a point of order under discussion be immediately decided, then Senator seeking recognition may rise in his seat and without recognition read a written demand upon the Senator presiding, provided the same is signed by a majority of the Senators present, and if the Senator presiding persists in his refusal, then any number of Senators constituting a majority of the Senators present, may present such written demand to the Sergeant-at-Arms, or the Assistant Sergeant-at-Arms, and such written demand shall be a full and sufficient warrant for arrest, empowering such officer, or either of them, to arrest said Senator so presiding and eject him from the chair, and retain him under arrest until he shall be released by order of the Senate.

"Should the Sergeant-at-Arms or Assistant Sergeant-at-Arms fail or refuse to act and carry out such demand, they shall be removed from office on a majority vote of the Sen

ate.

"When such Senator is removed as aforesaid and the chair remains vacant, the Secretary shall call the