Decisions of the Senate of Pennsylvania on Points of Order.

The Senate decided that the previous question having been called on the pending question of a bill and not sustained, could be called again on the same day. [Senate Journal, 1844, p. 690.]

Decided it in order, without asking leave of the Senate, to make a motion to re-consider the vote negativing a bill on its final passage, when the order for the third reading of bills has been reached. [Senate Journal, 1844, pp. 836-7.]

Not in order to amend amendments made by the House of Representatives to amendments made by Senate, to a bill from the House of Representatives. [Senate Journal, 1844, pp. 935-6.]

The Senate decided that when bills on first reading being the pending order, it was not in order to proceed to the consideration of a bill not first in numerical order, without dispensing with the orders of the day. [Senate Journal, 1845, pp. 169, 170.]

The Speaker, when a motion to re-consider a vote on the Executive nomination for president judge was pending, decided that the question was not debatable. [Senate Journal, 1847, p. 337.]

The Speaker decided that a bill to remove the seat of justice of a county was a private bill. From which decision an appeal was taken, and the decision sustained by the Senate. [Senate Journal,

1848, p. 280.]

The Speaker decided that the defeat of the first section of a bill did not necessarily involve the de

feat of the whole bill, should there be more than one section in such bill, and where such section or sections are sensible and independent of said first section. From which decision an appeal was taken, and the decision of the Speaker sustained by the Senate. [Senate Journal, 1848, p. 566.]

A motion for postponement being before the Senate, the previous question was called. The Speaker decided that if the call was sustained, the first question would be on the motion to postpone, and not on the bill pending. From which decision an appeal was taken, and the decision reversed by the Senate. [Senate Journal, 1850, pp. 265, 269.]

Amendments made by the House of Representatives (consisting of two new sections) to amendments made by the Senate, to a bill from the House of Representatives, having been concurred in by the Senate, a motion was made to amend those amendments by adding a new section. The Speaker decided the motion to be not in order. From which an appeal was taken, and the decision sustained by the Senate. [Senate Journal, 1850, p. 549.]

1. Has the Speaker of this body a right to rule the first section of a bill on second reading out of order, on account of its having been inserted in committee of the whole, by an alleged violation, on the part of the chairman, of the fourth joint rule?

2. The Wetherill divorce case having been negatived in Senate, is it in order in the face of objection under parliamentary laws, to re-introduce and consider the same proposition, either in Senate or in committee, under the fourth joint rule?

The Speaker declining to decide the above points of order, submitted the same to the Senate; and

both were decided in the negative. [Senate Journal, 1850, pp. 994, 1000, 1001.]

The Speaker having decided it to be in order to introduce and proceed to the consideration of a bill, a similar bill having been already negatived by the Senate, an appeal was taken, and the decision was reversed by the Senate. [Senate Journal, 1850, p. 1150.]

The Speaker decided that the committee to whom a bill had been referred, had full power over the same, except that it could not change the title or subject thereof. Undecided. [Senate Journal, 1857, p. 842.]

The Speaker decided that bill, entitled "An Act to give jurisdiction in equity to the Supreme Court and courts of common pleas for the county of Philadelphia, in case of disputed boundaries,” (the said bill referring only to disputed boundaries in Philadelphia county,) was a private bill. The Senate sustained the decision. [Senate Journal, 1858, p. 590.]

The Speaker decided that the proper motion, after the chairman of the committee of the whole had reported the first section of a bill negatived, was: "Will the Senate adopt the report of the committee of the whole?" [Senate Journal, 1861, p. 248.]

The Speaker decided that in concurring in amendments made by the House of Representatives, it was in order for the Senate to amend the title to correspond with the amendment made by the House of Representatives. [Senate Journal, 1861, p. 254.]

A bill having been reported from a committee at a morning session, a resolution was passed fixing sessions for the afternoon and evening, for the consideration of said bill. The bill passed committee

of the whole at the afternoon session, and upon a motion being made, at the evening session, to proceed to the second reading and consideration of the same, a question of order was raised, to wit: That the bill having been read once that day, it was not in order to proceed to its second reading without a suspension of the rule that prohibits the reading of bills twice on the same day. The Speaker decided the point of order not well taken. The Senate sustained the decision. [Senate Journal, 1861, pp. 323, 324.]

The Speaker decided it to be in order to proceed to the consideration of bill to prohibit the importation of fish into Philadelphia, and ports adjacent, at improper seasons, at an afternoon session set apart for the consideration of private bills. [Senate Journal, 1861, p. 546.]

The Speaker decided that it was not in order to go into committee of the whole (the bill being on third reading) for the purpose of striking out the amendment that had been inserted on second reading. [Senate Journal, 1861, p. 547.]

The resolution relative to the abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia, being before the Senate, the Speaker decided that an amendment striking out all after the enacting clause, and inserting the words as follows, viz: "That the energies of the government should be devoted to the suppression of the existing rebellion, and to the maintenance of the Union and the Constitution, and it is inexpedient at this time for Congress to legislate upon the subject of abolishing negro servitude, either in State, Territory or the District of Columbia; and that our Senators in Congress be and they are hereby in

structed, and our Representatives requested, to vote for such legislation as will best carry out the spirit and meaning of the foregoing resolution," was not in order." [Senate Journal, 1862, p. 283.] The bill, entitled "An Act to repeal the act approved March 7, 1861, entitled 'An Act for the commutation of tonnage duties,"" being under consideration, the Senator from Northumberland (Mr. Bound) moved to amend the first section of the bill by striking out all after the enacting clause, and inserting in lieu thereof as follows, viz:

"That on and after the first day of July, A. D. 1862, there shall be levied upon all the tonnage of this Commonwealth, whether passing through or transported from any part of the State, two and a half cents per ton upon all the products of mines, forests and farms, and five cents per ton upon all merchandise; and the railroad, canal and slackwater navigation companies upon which such tonnage shall be first received, shall collect, for the use of the Commonwealth, all such duties as hereinbefore directed, and pay the same, quarterly, to the State Treasurer; and the revenues derived from tonnage duties shall be applied exclusively to the payment of any debt or debts now contracted, or hereafter to be contracted, by this State, for its own defence, or to sustain the National Government in prosecuting the war to maintain the unity of the Republic, until such debt or debts shall be cancelled; and so much of the act approved 16th of May, A. D. 1861, entitled 'An Act to provide for the payment of the members, officers and contingent expenses of the extra session of the Legislature,' as imposes a special tax upon the taxable property of