FEMALE SUFFRAGE.
Mr. FOULKE offered a joint resolution [S. -] proposing to Section 2, Article 2, of the Constitution an amendment abolishing all Qualification of voters on account of sex.
Mr. BROWN raised the point of order that while there is an amendment pending either before the Legislature or the people the Constitution provides no other proposition shall be made. Any member can make a proposition, but not while pending amendments are undisposed of.
Mr. FOULKE referred to the decision of the Senate that there are no Constitutional amendments pending, which is res adjudicata as far as this House is concerned.
Mr. BELL referred to the fact that the Senate composes but one-third in number of the General Assembly, and that Constitutional amendments are pending in the other branch of the Legislature.
Mr. VAN VORHIS considered the action of the other House has nothing to do with the action of this body in that matter.
Mr. BROWN insisted that it takes the Senate and House of Representatives to constitute the General Assembly. He read Article 16, Section 1, of the Constitution, then Section 2 of the same article. Then both branches must declare the action of the General Assembly. The Constitutional amendments are presumably awaiting the action of the General Assembly until both Houses decide otherwise. So long as the question of their reference is undisposed of they are awaiting the action of the General Assembly. The Senate has adopted a report from the Judiciary Committee which says these amendments are not awaiting the action of the General Assembly. That may be true or not. That report is not binding upon the Senate by any means. He was surprised that some of the advocates of those measures have not forced the Senate to a vote upon them. They still are here and will be here until both branches of the Legislature declare otherwise.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR: I want to hear the Senator from Madison [Mr. Henry] and the Senator from Wabash [Mr. Sayre] on this point.
Mr. HENRY was surprised at the position taken by the Senator from Jackson [Mr. Brown]. We had the question referred to the Judiciary Committee, and that Committee reported that there were no Constitutional amendments pending. This Senate agreed to the proposition, and it is settled by the journals of this body that there are no amendments pending or referred to this Legislature from the last. How are you going to get around it?
Mr. BROWN (interposing): Suppose the House of Representatives should agreed to these amendments. If it does they will come here, won't they? And suppose myself and four or five other Senators on this side change our minds and vote with you gentlemen on the other side (who have been so anxious to agree to them) and carry them, would they not be valid?
Mr. HENRY (resuming): They would not be valid. This Senate has by deliberate action, after four days' discussion, solemly said, and it is a matter of record, that they are not taken before us; and the Senator from Jackson will not take the position that any action of the Senate submitting them to the people would be legal, even were they ratified by the people. It is foolish to say the action of the other House can affect the action of this House on this question. The point of order is not well taken because the Senate has no official notice of what the House has done.
Mr. SAYRE thought the action of the Senate in this matter is final and binding for the remainder of the session. Suppose the House of Representatives never make a report to the Senate about Constitutional amendments, are we thereby to be precluded from taking action on any amendments to the Constitution that may be proposed? The point of order, evidentally, is not well taken.
Mr. FOULKE: According to the position of the Senator from Jackson [Mr. Brown] we can not submit to the people the present proposed amendments to the Constitution because they are not pending before us, and we can not introduce any new amendments because the present amendments are pending before us. Those two statements can not stand together. The adjudication of the Senate is binding on the Senate during the session as to any like matter that may subsequently arise. The majority report of the Judiciary Committee says there are no amendments awaiting the action of this General Assembly. If that be so, there can be nothing awaiting either branch of the Legislature. The decision that there are none before the Senate is binding upon the Senate, and if there are none before the Senate there can be none before the House. And because there are no other amendments pending, it is proper that my resolution should be introduced. According to the doctrine the Senator from Jackson advocated upon this floor in the discussion the other day, no amendments are pending before either branch. He claimed the defects were fatal, and the Senate so decided. If that decision is right I have the right to introduce this resolution. If the decision the Senate made the other day is wrong, it is still a law to itself, and we have the right to introduce any other amendments.
Mr. BROWN (interposing): Can it be said that the General Assembly of the State of Indiana has decided that these amendments are not pending until the House of Representatives has concurred with the decision of the Senate?
Mr. FOULKE (resuming): Possibly not, but it can be said that the Senate has decided they are not pending before either House.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR: I have my mind made up, but I do not want to decide the point. If the Senate wants to hear my opinion I will give it. [Several Senators-"Go on." "Let us have it."] I think the amendments are pending before the General Assembly, and the Constitution says you can not introduce additional amendments, if any are pending. You can not introduce these in the House to-day. If you have the right to introduce them here you have the right in the House. If the House passes them and the Senate agrees, I think they would be before the people. Of course it is a question I would rather not decide. I would rather it would go to the Judiciary Committee. I would like for the Senator from Jackson to withdraw his point and let it go to the Judiciary Committee, and let them report to-morrow.
Mr. BROWN: If I do that I admit the introduction of this amendment.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR: The Committee can report it is not proper.
Mr. BROWN: The Chair sustains my point of order and I don't like to give up the verdict after gaining my case.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR: I would like the Senator to do it.
page: 143[View Page 143]Mr. BROWN: I have no objection to referring the point of order to the Judiciary Committee.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR: No, let the resolution go.
Mr. BROWN: The resolution would, then be before the Senate.
Mr. FOULKE, to relieve the embarrassment, asked leave to withdraw the resolution for the present.
SEVERAL SENATORS-"Consent," "Consent."
