BILLS OF EXCEPTIONS.
The PRESIDENT pro tem. [Mr. Gray in the chair] announced the consideration of Mr. Bradley's bill [S. 164] to authorize the amendment of bills of exceptions in certain cases; and it was read the third time.
Mr. HANNA explained that the bill permitted an amendment of bills of exceptions after term time in cases of omissions, &c.
Mr. HUMPHREYS understood the bill was introduced to cover a case in which one of his constituents is interested. It has gone up to the Supreme Court, and if this bill is passed it would operate as a great hardship in the case referred to. In justice to that constituent he hoped the bill would not pass. He moved that it be indefinitely postponed.
Mr. SCOTT had a similar understanding of the object of this bill, and expressed his oposition to it.
Mr. STEIN was favorable to the passage of the bill. If a bill now on the file, providing that this class of legislation shall not be retroactive, shall pass, the objection named will be removed, of course. It may be that the fear of injuring one case will cause votes to be csst against this bill, but he apprehended that the fears expressed were groundless, for if the case referred to is pending in the Supreme Court, the bill of exceptions is already made up, and the passage-of this law will riot affect it. At any rate we should riot be deterred from our duty, because of an exceptional case. He defended the principle upon which the bill is based.
Mr. SCOTT asked for unanimous consent to amend the bill so that it shall apply only to the future.
Mr. HANNA did not give consent. He spoke in favor of the bill.
Mr. RICE insisted that the Legislate should not come in and cure defects, 0, correct mistakes of attorneys, in making up their bills of exceptions, or in any other matters.
The motion to indefinitely postpone the bill was rejected by yeas 15, nays 20.
Mr. WOLCOTT regarded this as a bill not for the benefit of attorneys but parties litigant.
It failed to pass the Senate for want of a Constitutional majority of 26-yeas 21 nays 14.
