then elected, rules adopted and committees chosen. As a rule the constitutions empower each house to choose its own officers. Frequently the presiding officer receives additional compensation."

The most important feature of the organization is the selection of committees to pass upon the bills that will be introduced by the members of the legislature and to recommend their passage or rejection by the house. "The standing-committee. system in its modern form," says a well-known writer,8

involves the following particulars: the institution by a legislative body, (1) as a regular practice, of (2) several committees, (3) composed of its own members and (4) continuing in existence throughout the session, each of which (5) has charge of a specific division of the business of the house in such manner that all matters falling within that division are regularly and usually referred to that committee for preparative consideration previously to final action upon them by the house."

The committee system is one of the distinct characteristics of American legislatures which are, it is remembered,' lacking in legally-provided leaders and in practice have no responsible leadership. The work of legislation is accomplished by the committees appointed as a rule by the speakers of the respective houses. They do their work for the most part without publicity and no record is kept of their transactions. Membership in even the most important of some forty committees confers, outside the legislature, at least, little if any prestige and as they do not depend for their continuance upon the continued approval of their policies by the house, they have none of the incentives to thorough and conscientious work that influence the ministry of England. Responsibility for their action is diffi

Cal. (IV, 24), La. (165), Mich. (XVI, 6) specify that proceedings shall be in the English language.

e. g., N. J., IV, Sec. IV, 7.

Jameson, J. F., 9 Pol. Sc. Qu., 246, seq. (247).

"Germs of such a system in the procedure of the English Parliament may perhaps be discovered in the practice, begun in the reign of Edward I and till as late as 1886 solemnly continued, of appointing at the beginning of the session two groups of triers of petitions whose duty it was to sift petitions, and report to the law courts, king and Parliament those which should properly be referred to each." See Stubbs, Const. Hist., II, 263, III, 452; Anson. I, 30910. During Elizabeth's reign committees became fully developed in Parliament and before the middle of the seventeenth century ruled England. Virginia and Maryland were the first colonies whose legislatures employed them; prior to the revolution they were unknown in New England; but they have since spread throughout the states.

'See supra, ch. 8.

124. Committees.

cult to place, especially where, as is usual, the committees are composed of a score or more of members. Large, unwieldly committees are, indeed, most prominent in those states that are controlled by political machines, which find them convenient registers of machine policies. Large committees are often divided into sub-committees for the investigation of particular subjects or the preparation of important bills. Sub-committees are appointed by committee chairmen and have obviously little responsibility to the legislature as a whole.

"The true work of a committee," says Professor Reinsch,2

can of course be best done by a small group of men who may gather around a table, and engage in an informal discussion of the business in hand. To make of it another assembly, even though it be considerably smaller than the House itself, is usually to defeat the possibility of efficient action.

Where committees are of workable size and take their work seriously, as in Massachusetts, they often do excellent work. Public hearings can be made a very important and useful part of the process of law-making and their effect is often most salutary. Committees sometimes sit in the intervals between legislative sessions or during recesses of the legislature and make investigations upon which to base legislative action.

Joint committees of the two houses and conference committees are made use of in some states. Obviously they present a means of increasing the coöperation of the two houses of a bicameral legislature.

"In view of the great importance of legislative committees," says Professor Dealey,*

it is strange that so few constitutions attempt to regulate them. The task is apparently too great for conventions. The only provisions are the following: Some nine states require that all bills must be referred to a committee. Oklahoma provides that the senate shall elect all of its standing committees by a majority vote. Kentucky states that whenever a committee fails or refuses to report within a reasonable time,

2Op. cit., 164.

In some states (e. g., Md. III, 24) the power to summon witnesses for legislative purposes is expressly granted by the constitution. For dictum that person not excused from giving incriminating evidence, see In re Falvey, 7 Wis., 630.

Op. cit., 190, 191.

any member may call up the bill. Michigan forbids any rule that would prevent a majority of the members elected from discharging a committee from the further consideration of any measure. Three states make provision for a joint committee on local and special legislation, which under its instructions ought to be most useful in handling that distressing part of legislation. Five states provide that voting on reports of committees of conference shall be recorded by a yea and nay vote.

Procedure of

While neglecting the essential agents in the legislative process, in failing for the most part to take cognizance of the committee system, the state constitutions detail with great, though, 125, varying, elaboration much of the procedure of law-making. Law-Making. About half of them provide that enactment shall be by bill only; Rhode Island goes to the trouble of saying that the concurrence of both houses is necessary to enactment. Somewhat more than half specify that bills may originate in either house."

Georgia and Nebraska provide that appropriation bills must originate in the lower house, but in the former the Senate may propose or concur in amendments. Massachusetts and New Hampshire provide that all money bills must so originate, but the senate may likewise propose or concur in amendments. Idaho, Indiana and Oregon limit to the lower house the origin of bills for raising revenue, as do a number of other states, while allowing the Senate to propose amendments or alter or reject the bills.

The introduction of bills is subject to various limitations. New Mexico specifically declares that no bill shall be acted upon unless introduced at the same session; West Virginia that bills must be entered on the journal, described by title and number. In Mississippi and Arkansas no new bill may be introduced into either house during the last three days of a session; in Maryland and other states the corresponding limitation is ten

Ala., Ark., Cal., Colo, Id., Ind., Kan., Md., Mich., Miss., Mont., Mo., Nebr., Nev., N. M., N. Y., N. D., Pa., Tex., Va., Wash., Wis., Wyo. Much law may in fact, however, be enacted by joint resolutions. In more than half the states they are not subject to the governor's veto.

Mr.

Cal., Fla., Id., Ill., Ind., Ia., Kan., Me., Md., Mich., Miss., Mo., Nebr., Nev., N. M., N. Y., N. D., O., Ore., S. C., S. D., Tenn., Tex.. Wash., W. Va., Wis. Caldwell believed that the original proposition of this kind was in the Tenn. constitution of 1796.--Constitutional History of Tennessee, 138.

Ala., Colo., Del., Ga., Ky., La., Minn., Mont., N. J., Okla., Pa., S. C., Tex., Vt., Wyo. Kentucky prudently adds that no new matter is to be introduced, under color of an amendment, which does not relate to raising revenue.

The same is, of course, true in states which require bills to be read three times on three different days prior to final passage.

days, with provision that by two-thirds vote the house may override the rule." In Minnesota1 no bill may be introduced during the last twenty days, or in Nebraska after the first twenty days, of a session save at the instance of the governor. In Colorado no bill may be introduced after thirty days, except general appropriation bills for the expenses of government. No appropriation bill, except for expenses of government, may be introduced in Montana within ten days of the close of a session, in Wyoming within five days, in North Dakota after the fortieth day, except by unanimous consent of the house."

Rejected bills, or bills of similar substance, must not be passed during the same session in Tennessee and Texas; nor may such bills again be proposed in Louisiana, save by consent of a majority, nor in Georgia without consent of two-thirds.

The form of the enacting clause is almost invariably prescribed, for instance, Be it enacted by the people, by the state, by the general assembly, "by the senate and house of representatives in general court assembled, and by the authority of the same." Alabama specifically says that the enacting clause need not be repeated before subsequent sections of the same bill, which may be divided into sections according to substance and the sections designated by figures. Idaho, Indiana and Oregon provide that every act must be plainly worded, avoiding as far as practicable the use of technical terms. In Maryland every public general law must be divided into articles and sections.

A majority of the constitutions provide that no bill may be passed embracing more than one subject, which usually must be expressed in the title. In a few, however, matters properly connected with the expressed subject may also be included. In some states there are exceptions to these rules, chiefly general appropriation and revenue bills and bills for the codification and general revision of laws.

Special regulations for bills amending previous acts are frequently met with in the constitutions, chiefly prohibition of

PIII, 4. General appropriation bills may be introduced during first 40 days.

1IV, I.

Likewise in New Mexico, after the tenth day prior to the expiration of the session except for "current" expenses of government: applies also to bills to increase the compensation of office or to create any lucrative office.

IV, 45.

amendment by reference to title only. Sometimes the portion of the act as amended or even the old text that is to be changed must be set forth at length. A few states have similar rules for bills reviving former enactments.

About one-third of the states expressly declare that an act containing subject-matter not embraced in its title shall be void only to the extent of the unembraced portion. Maryland1 declares that no law shall be construed by reason of its title to grant powers or confer rights not expressly contained in the body of the act. Mississippi" provides that the committee to which a bill is referred shall express in writing its judgment of the sufficiency of the title, whether or not it recommends that the bill shall pass.

Some constitutions require that bills must be submitted to committees prior to passage. In Texas' no bill may be passed unless reported from its committee at least three days before final adjournment. Virginia provides that a committee may not be discharged from considering a bill save by a majority on a yea and nay vote, the names of the voters to be entered on the journal; at least two-fifths of the members of the house must vote affirmatively. Half a dozen states provide especially that each house may by vote, usually of a majority, accept the report of a committee of conference.

A large majority of the constitutions provide that bills must be read three times in each house, usually on three different days, though some states allow two readings on one day. There are various exceptions to the rule requiring readings, chiefly in cases of emergency or by vote of an extraordinary majority or both. A few of the constitutions specify that the readings shall be "at length," at least on final passage. A few others specify that one or more of the readings shall be by sections

*III, 29. IV, 71.

Ala., IV, 62; Colo. V, 20; Ky., 46; La., 39; Miss., IV, 74; Mo., IV, 27; Mont., V, 22; Pa., III, 2; Tex., III, 37; Va., IV, 50; Wyo., III, 23.

III, 37.

8See, e. g., Ark., V, 22; N. D., II, 63.

See Ariz. IV, Pt. II, 12; Cal. IV, 15; Fla. III, 17; Ga. III, Sec. VII, 7; Ida. III, 15; Ind. IV, 18; Kan. II, 15; Md. III, 27; Miss. IV, 59; Nev. IV,, 18; O. II, 16; Ore. IV, 19; Tex. III, 32; Va. IV, 50; W. Va. VI, 29. Emergency measures are allowed exemption from a number of rules governing ordinary legislation.