Imagens das páginas
PDF
ePub

manner as shall be best calculated to subserve the public interest, and as will furnish at least one copy thereof to each state library.

Resolved, That the Senators from this State in the Congress of the United States be instructed, and the Representatives requested, to use their influence to procure the passage of a law providing for the accomplishment of the design recommended in the foregoing resolution.

And be it further resolved, That His Excellency the Governor be requested to forward a copy of the foregoing preamble and resolutions to the presiding officers of both Houses of the 29th Congress, and to each of our Senators and Representatives in Congress.

On the question,
Shall said preamble and resolutions be adopted?
It was decided in the affirmative.

Ordered, That the clerk request the concurrence of the Sen'ate therein.

On motion of Mr. Bean of Warner

The House resumed the consideration of the bill, entitled “An act to prohibit members of the legislature from receiving pay when not in actual attendance upon the duties thereof," with the amendments which came down from the Senate.

The Senate proposed so to amend said bill, as to strike out all after the enacting clause and insert a substitute.

The sections of said bill were as follows:

Section 1. It shall be unlawful for any member of either branch of the legislature of this State, to receive pay for his attendance, as such member, upon any day, when the House to which belongs shall sit, during some portion of which day he shall not have been actually present during the sitting thereof, unless specially excused by a vote of the house to which he belongs.

Sec. 2. Every member of both branches of the legislature, who shall have been absent, without special permission, any number of days during any session of the legislature, shall furnish to the clerk of the house to which he belongs, one day at least before the close of the session, an accurate statement of the number of days he has been so absent; and the clerks of both houses shall make

up
their
pay

rolls in accordance with such statements. Sec. 3. This act shall take effect and be in force from and af

ter its passage.

The amendment of the Senate was as follows: That from and after the passage of this act, it shall be unlawful for any member or officer of the executive or either branch of

the legislature of this State, to receive pay for his attendance for any day on which he may have been absent during the whole sitting, unless detained from his place by sickness, or specially excused from attending by a vote of the body to which he belongs. And every member or officer who may have been absent for any number of days during any session of the legislature, shall furnish to the clerk or officer charged with the making up of the pay roll for the branch to which he belongs, at least one day before the close of the session, a statement of the number of days he may have been absent, and the pay rolls shall be made up accordingly.

On the question,

Will the House concur with the Senate in the adoption of the foregoing amendment?

The yeas and nays were called for.

Those who voted in the affirmative were Messrs.

Sawyer of Atkinson
Martin
Folsom
Quimby of Danville
Tilton of Deerfield
Melvin
Ela
Tilton of East Kingston
Morrill
Packer
Heath
Frost
Doe
Batchelder of Northwood
George
Scribner
Moulton
Norton
Pecker
Brown of Rye
Boyd
Fitts
Lane
Young
Sherburne

Waldron of Dover
Wadleigh of Dover
Peirce of Dover
Thompson
Roberts of Farmington
Jenkins
Swasey
Shaw
Lathrop
Caverly
Foss of Strafford
Roberts of Alton
Davis
Collins of Barnstead
Hodgdon
Blake of Centre Harbor
Ham
Clifford
Bean of Gilmanton
Wadleigh of Meredith
Magoon
Sanborn
Coombs
Hodge
McMillen

Perkins Champion Rice Smith of Moultonborough Sawyer of Wakefield Cate Cotton Corser Gerrish of Boscawen Green Jones of Bradford Clough of Canterbury Kowlton Carter Rolfe Noyes Fowler Page of Concord Wait Foster of Henniker Craig Mitchell Patterson Page of Hopkinton Clough of Loudon Gibson Trussell Wadleigh of Northfield Lyford Fellows Page of Sutton Collins of Warner Bean of Warner Boylston Griffin Swett Shattuck Manahan Richards Sargent of Goffstown Hadley of Hancock Goodale

Ayer Tenney McQuesten of Litchfield Cram of Lyndeborough Brown of Manchester Moore Foster of Manchester James Mowry Smith of Manchester Smith of Mont Vernon Chase of Nashua Lawrence Gay Wetherbee Hogg Atwood Miller Morrison Nay Paige of Weare Cram of Wilton Vilas Marshall Day Felt Wheeler of Keene Batcheller of Marlborough Baker Hutchinson Cook of Richmond Adams of Roxbury Eaton Peabody Richardson Hewes Maynard Albee Tracy Williams Tolles Cooper

Willey
Brown of Grantham
Garfield
Hall
Nettleton
Reed
Howard
Chase of Unity
Sargent of Wendell
Crawford
Whitcher
Quimby of Bethlehem
Batchelder of Bridgewater
Blair
Lowe
Clough of Enfield
Jessaman
McClure of Groton
Ross
Morse of Haverhill
Batchelder of Haverhill
Dickerson
Curry
Poor
Kenrick

Morse of Lisbon
Kellogg
Burnham
Stevens of Lyman
Webster
Rogers
Gilman
Doton
Smart
Clement
Avery
Pitman
Wheeler of Berlin
Tuttle
Severance
Mathes
Crane
Gerrish of Jackson
Summers
Adams of Lancaster
Parker of Milan
Dunn
Tibbetts
Brown of Northumberland
Carlton

Those who voted in the negative were Messrs.

Orcutt

Sawyer of Dover Marston of Exeter

Demeritt of Lee Kelly

Hilton Marston of Hampton

Dame Blake of Kensington

Blaisdell of Gilford Calef

Thing Hart

Plumer Brooks

Merrill Batchelder of North Hampton Eastman Beck

Brown of Ossipee Vennard

Sinclair Hadley of Portsmouth Wentworth Woodbury

Skinner Hill

Bean of Tuftonborough

Rowe
Wallace
Nesmith
Waldron of Wilmot
Ramsey
Pratt
Parker of Merrimack
Baldwin
Preston
Smith of Temple
Gove
Hamilton
Pierce of Chesterfield
Stebbins

Edwards
Wilcox
Pomeroy
Proctor
Capron
Smith of Winchester
Jones of Washington
Stevens of Bristol
Knowles
Haddock
McClure of Hebron
Blaisdell of Lebanon
Foss of Thornton
McQuesten of Wentworth

Ayes 152, Noes 56.
So the affirmative of the question prevailed,
And said amendment was concurred in by the House.
On the question,

Will the House concur with the Senate in their amendment to the title of said bill?

It was decided in the affirmative.

Ordered, That the clerk inform the Senate of the concurrence of the House in said amendments.

On motion of Mr. Page of Sutton

The House resumed the consideration of the bill, entitled “An act to sever a part of the town of Grantham and annex the same to the town of Plainfield.”

Mr. Page of Sutton proposed an amendment to said bill.
But before the question was taken,
Ou motion of Mr. Fowler-
Resolved, That said bill lie upon the table.
On notion of Mr. Foster of Henniker-

Resolved, That the committee on the Judiciary be instructed to inquire into the expediency of so amending the law, that the crime of adultery be punished by confinement to hard labor in the State Prison for a term of

years. The following message was received from the Senate by their clerk:

“Mr. Speaker-The Senate have postponed indefinitely the bills with the following titles:

« AnteriorContinuar »