¹ Redlich, Josef, The Procedure of the House of Commons, Vol. I, p. 78 Google Scholar.

² Redlich, Vol. I, p. 84. The Committee of 1848 studied the procedure of the French chamber and of the house of representatives of the United States.

³ “As in other fields of action Parliament, during the nineteenth century more than in any former time showed itself under the sway of a radicalism which, starting from considerations of pure utility, was prepared to lay aside old forms and rules and to adopt alterations as soon as the practical necessity for them was proved.”—Redlich, p. 74. For radical suggestions of reform see Lord Althorp's suggestions in 1833 and Mr. (afterwards Sir) Thomas Erskine May's suggestions in 1854 and 1878 discussed in Redlich, pp. 74–116.

⁴ See Redlich, p. 81, 84, 88.

⁵ Redlich, p. 89.

⁶ See Jefferson's Manual, Preface.

⁷ McConachie, L., Congressional Committees, p. 10 Google Scholar.

⁸ Congressional Debates, 1836–37, January 10, 1837, Col. 1340–44. “The policy of our rules and the practice under them have always been to employ the agency of committees organized by the house to originate and bring in bills. …. These committees have a right to report by bill without an order of the house. ….” “No individual member has this right.” Col. 1344. An instance of attempted introduction of a bill in the house by motion for leave is found in 2d sess., 19 Cong. Debates, Col. 775–76. It was described by Mr. Powell as “a very unusual proceeding.” “The ordinary mode adopted by gentlemen who wished to have a bill on any particular subject introduced into the house was to offer a resolution proposing an inquiry on the subject by some one of the committees of the house.” In the 1st sess., 20 Cong. Debates, December 19, 1827, Mr. Archer declared “If a mere member of the house may on leave bring in any bill which suits his particular views and that bill must of necessity pass immediately to its first and second reading all sound legislation would be at an end.” Col. 824. The practice of introducing bills on motion for leave had already found acceptance in the senate. Ibid., Col. 1344.

⁹ See Hinds' Precedents, iv, 3365 Google Scholar; Also Jefferson's Manual, sec. xxiii; House Manual, 62d Cong., 3d session, sec. 391.

¹⁰ House Manual and Digest, 62d Cong., 3d sess., sec. 812.

¹¹ See House Manual and Digest, 62d Cong., 3d sess., secs. 811–14 for discussion.

¹² See the general printing statute approved January 12, 1895, as modified by amendments adopted January 20, 1905, and June 25,1910.

¹³ Extra-legally various other means of controlling the attention given various measures have developed. The legislative party caucas is often important in this work. The standing committees act as sifting agencies, several state legislatures have joint finance committees which act as general revising authorities for money bills and the use of special informal “sifting” “steering” or “special orders committees,” especially in the last days of legislative sessions is familiar. The mention of these agencies shows, however, that they lack the “responsible” character of the cabinet control in England.

¹⁴ Pamphlet, The Distrust of State Legislatures, E. O'Neal, The Brown Printing Company, Montgomery, Ala., 1913, p. 15. “In an experience with legislatures in Colorado, Oklahoma, and Arizona, I have seen more vicious legislation passed during the rush of the closing day of a limited legislature than during all the rest of the session.”—L. F. Swetting, Clerk of the House of Representatives of Arizona.

¹⁵ Bills are still introduced on motion in North Carolina but encounter at that stage “very little opposition.”—J. Bryan Grimes, Secretary of State of North Carolina. In this connection see Rules of the House of Representatives of Massachusetts, Rule 40. In New Jersey “All bills are introduced on leave.”—M. F. Phillips, Clerk of House of Assembly.

¹⁶ In Ohio there are no restrictions on the number of bills which a member may introduce nor on the time when this may occur.—J. R. Cassidy, Clerk of the House of Representatives.

Similar: Florida.—J. G. Kellum, Chief Clerk of the House of Representatives.

Minnesota.—Oscar Arneson, Chief Clerk of the House of Representatives.

In Minnesota a constitutional provision forbids the introduction of bills within twenty days of the close of the session unless executive permission is given. In 1913 the house added another ten days, bills being then introduced only by permission of the rules committee. Executive permission was easy to secure, however, and the rule therefore had little effect.—Oscar Arneson, Chief Clerk of the House of Representatives of Minnesota.

In Pennsylvania a resolution limiting the time when introduction of bills shall cease is usually adopted.—Jas. N. Moore, Director of Legislative Reference Bureau.

In Montana by legislative rule no appropriation bills are introduced after fortieth day except by unanimous consent. No restriction on other bills. May even be introduced on last day of session.—C. Z. Pond, Chief Clerk 13th Legislative Assembly.

In New Hampshire introduction by members limited to first three weeks but committees may introduce at any time. The rule is only a weak check in practice. —H. M. Young, Clerk of the House of Representatives.

In Vermont rules “have always provided that no bill shall be introduced …. after the first Tuesday in November” but the time is frequently extended and committee bills may be introduced at any time.—H. A. Block, Clerk of the House of Representatives.

In South Dakota the members bills are limited, those of committees not.—W. Burden, Chief Clerk of the House of Representatives.

In Iowa the introduction of bills by members ends three or four weeks before contemplated adjournment, but committees may introduce thereafter.—A. C. Gustafson, Chief Clerk of the House of Representatives.

In Arizona in the first regular and three special sessions held since statehood “a common agreement was reached that no bills were to be introduced after a certain date usually fixed ten to fifteen days before the close of the session.”—L. F. Sweeting, Clerk of the House of Representatives.

In Colorado “Bills are introduced only during the first thirty days of the session.”—Clerk of the House of Representatives of Colorado.

In Illinois a time limit put on introduction of bills but could be introduced thereafter if no objection. In practice “Unanimous consent was always given.”—Wm. McKinley, Speaker of the House of Representatives of Illinois.

¹⁷ North Carolina. Bills dropped into a box on the speaker's desk which “at the proper time is opened …. and the bills are read before the houses by the clerk.”—J. Bryan Grimes, Secretary of State of North Carolina.

Similar use of a “bill box” in New York; Rules of the Assembly, 1913, Rule 6, par. 1.

¹⁸ This is the practice for example in New York. Rules of the Assembly of the State of New York (1913), Rule 5.

¹⁹ The practice found in many states by which a bill is read twice by title before commitment, announced when it comes up for the first debate (offfen known as the report stage) and when up on third reading is indefensible. It amounts in practice to four readings.

²⁰ Reading requirements in the state constitutions. Bills must be read.

Alabama (1901). “Immediately before signing” unless dispensed with by two-thirds vote. 66. “On three different days in each house” and at final passage at length. 63.

Arizona (1910). “By sections on three different days” unless dispensed with by two-thirds vote but on final passage reading at length “shall in no case be dispensed with.” Art. 4, p. 2, sec. 12.

Arkansas (1874). “At length, on three different days, in each house; unless the rules be suspended by two-thirds of the house when the same may be read a second or third time on the same day.” 5, 22.

California (1879). “On three several days in each house” unless dispensed with by two-thirds vote,” “and on the final passage of all bills they shall be read at length.” 4, 15.

Colorado (1876). “At length on three different days in each house.” 5, 22.

Titles are read after passage before presiding officer signs. 5, 26.

Connecticut (1818). No provisions.

Delaware (1897). No provisions.

Florida (1885). “By sections on three several days in each house” unless in emergency suspended by two-thirds vote “but the reading of a bill by sections on its final passage shall in no case be dispensed with. 3, 17. By amendment of 1896 first reading is by title unless one-third of members desire reading by sections. 3, 17.

Georgia (1877). Every bill “shall be read three times and on three separate days, in each house, unless in case of actual invasion or insurrection. 3, 7, 7. Amended 1898. First and second reading of each local bill and bank and railroad charters in each House shall consist of the reading of the title only, unless said bill is ordered to be engrossed.”

Idaho (1889). Bills read “on three several days in each house,” unless dispensed with by two-thirds vote. “On the final passage …. they shall be read at length section by section.” 3, 15.

Illinois (1870). “Every bill shall be read at large on three different days in each house.” 4, 13.

Indiana (1851). “Every bill shall be read by sections on three several days in each house” “unless in emergency suspended by two-thirds vote,” “but the reading …. on final passage shall in no case be dispensed with.” 4, 18.

Iowa (1857). Section 3, 17, speaks of “last reading” but nofurther provisions as to this stage.

Kansas (1859). “On three separate days in each house” unless dispensed with by two-thirds vote “but the reading of the bill by sections on its final passage shall in no case be dispensed with.” 2, 15.

Kentucky (1890). “Every bill shall be read at length on three different days in each house” but second and third may be dispensed with by majority vote of all members elected. 46.

Louisiana (1898). “On three different days in each house” and “once in full” except bills revising statutes or codes. 39. Title read or if requested by five members entire bill before being signed by presiding officer after passage by both houses. 41.

Maine (1819). No provisions.

Maryland (1867). “On three different days …. in each house” unless dispensed with by two-thirds of members elected. 3, 27.

Massachusetts (1780). No provisions.

Michigan (1908). “Every bill shall be read three times in each house before the final passage thereof.” 5, 23.

Minnesota (1857). “On three different days in each separate house” unless dispensed with by two-thirds of the house but “no bill shall be passed by either house until it shall have been previously read twice at length.” 4, 20.

Mississippi (1890). “On three different days in each house” unless dispensed with by two-thirds of the house. Each bill “must be read in full immediately before the vote on its final passage.” Before signing any bill passed the presiding officer must have the title read and on demand of any member the entire bill. 59.

Missouri (1875). “Every bill shall be read on three different days in each house.” 4, 26. After passage but before presiding officer signs the bill is read at length. 4, 37.

Montana (1889). No provisions.

Nebraska (1875). “At large on three different days in each house.” 3, 11.

Nevada (1864). “By sections on three several days in each house” unless in emergency suspended by two-thirds of the house “but the reading of a bill by sections on its final passage shall in no case be dispensed with.” 4, 18.

New Hampshire (1912). No provisions.

New Jersey (1844). “Three times in each house.” 4, 4, 6. In practice bills are read at large only on special request.—M. F. Phillips, Clerk of House of Assembly.

New Mexico (1910). “Three different times in each house, not more than two of which readings shall be on the same day, and the third of which shall be in full.” Exceptions made of bills for public peace, health and safety; revisions and codifications. 4, 15.

New York (1894). Sec. 3, 15, speaks of a last reading.

North Carolina (1876). Money bills must be “read three several times in each House …. and passed three several readings …. on three different days.” 2, 14.

North Dakota (1889). “Three several times but the first and second readings only may be upon the same day…. The first and third readings shall be at length.” 63.

Ohio (1913). “Every bill shall be fully and distinctly read on three different days” unless in case of urgency suspended by three-fourths of house. 2, 16.

Oklahoma (1907). “On three different days in each house” and “on its final passage …. at length.” After passage read at length before officer signs unless dispensed with by two-thirds of a quorum. 5, 34 and 35.

Oregon (1857). “By sections on three several days in each house” unless in cases of urgency suspended by two-thirds of the house. “But reading of a bill by sections on its final passage shall in no case be dispensed with.” 4, 19.

Pennsylvania (1873). “At length on three different days in each house.” 3, 4.

Rhode Island (1842). No provisions.

South Carolina (1895). “Three times and on three several days in each house.”

First and third readings may be by title. 3, 18.

South Dakota (1889). “Three several times but first and second …. may be on the same day …. the first and third readings shall be at length.” 3, 17.

Tennessee (1870). Must be “read and passed on three different days in each house.” 2, 18.

Texas (1876). “Read on three several days in eachhouse.” “In cases of imperative public necessity …. four-fifths of the house …. may suspend this rule.” 3, 32.

Utah (1895). “No bill …. shall be passed except …. after it has been read three times.” 6, 22.

Vermont (1793). No provisions.

Virginia (1902). “Read at length on three different calendar days in each house.” But does not apply in emergencies and in case of codifications if four-fifths of members voting dispense with rule. 50.

Washington (1889). No provisions.

West Virginia (1872). “Fully and distinctly read on three different days in each house unless in case of urgency” dispensed with by four-fifths vote of those present but engrossed bill must be read in full. 6, 29.

Wisconsin (1848). No provisions.

Wyoming (1889). No provisions.

²¹ Art. iv, sec. 20. Italics mine.

²² Board of supervisors of Ramsey County vs. Edward Heenan, 2 Minn. 330 (1858) (dictum) at pp. 334–35.

²³ Oscar Arneson, Chief Clerk of the House of Representatives of Minnesota. “The appropriation bills are the only bills read by sections and in full by reason of the fact that usually so many amendments are offered.” A number of States follow practices little less remarkable.

In Ohio for example (1913 Ohio Art. 2, sec. 16), the constitution requires “Every bill shall be fully and distinctly read on three different days unless in case of urgency three-fourths of the house in which it shall be pending shall dispense with the rule.” This by no means reflects practice. “Bills are rarely read three times in full.” In a great many cases the constitutional rule is dispensed with by a three-fourths vote, “by a blanket motion covering all bills on the calendar at the …. stage …. under consideration” and even where this is not done if the bill is long “the reading clerk reads only a paragraph here and there.”—J. R. Cassidy, Clerk of the House of Representatives of Ohio.

A similar decline of importance on the requirements concerning readings is illustrated by the practice in North Carolina. The constitution requires (1876 N. C. 2,14) that all money bills “Shall have been read three several times in each house of the general assembly and passed three several readings which readings shall have been on three different days and agreed to by each house respectively.” In practice the first reading is usually passed as a matter of form though it may be debated even then, and all readings are by title. Bills which do not make appropriations or levy taxes, especially local measures often pass all three readings on the same day.—J. Bryan Grimes, Secretary of State.

In Florida all bills are required to be read twice unless the rule is dispensed with by two-thirds vote. This is generally done. All are read by sections once. “It is a waste of time and some members use it to cause as much delay in legislation as possible.”—J. G. Kellum, Chief Clerk of the House of Representatives of Florida.

In Arizona the constitution requires three readings by sections (Const. Ariz., 1910, art. 4, pt. 2, sec. 12) but the first two readings may be by title if two-thirds of either house vote that it is necessary “in case of emergency.” An attempt to live up to the spirit of the rule was made in the first session following the grant of statehood. “After several long bills had been introduced and taken up from one hour and a half to two hours on first and second readings in full the provisions …. were referred to the attorney general.” He gave “an opinion that allowed those provisions …. to practically be killed by inserting …. (a) clause in the journal” that it was expedient that sec. 12, art. iv, of the constitution relating to the reading of bills by sections on first and second reading be dispensed with. “From about two weeks after the beginning of the regular session this method was followed with all bills.”—L. F. Sweeting, Clerk of the House of Representatives of Arizona.

²⁴ James N. Moore, Director of the Legislative Reference Bureau of Pennsylvania.

In Colorado the clerk of the house reports that “The practice of having three readings is observed in letter and spirit in our General Assembly.”

In Illinois the speaker of the house, reports “I do not believe that the present system of reading of bills by title or at large serves any useful purpose … it takes a lot of …. time and it is seldom, if ever, that any objection is raised.”

“Of course under our present constitution this must be done, but very often an hour and sometimes two or three hours are consumed in the reading of a bill on second and third reading that no member listens to.” “We not only attempt to actually follow out the clauses of our constitution but do as a matter of fact follow out to the letter these clauses.”—Wm. McKinley, Speaker of the House of Representatives.

²⁵ Wm. McKinley, Speaker of the House of Representatives.

²⁶ North Carolina.—J. Bryan Grimes, Secretary of State.

²⁷ North Carolina.

In Ohio formerly all debate and amendments took place on third reading.—John R. Cassidy, Clerk of the House of Representatives.

In Iowa debate is allowed only “in committee and upon the third reading of the bill.” The amendments are inserted in pen and ink.—A. G. Gustafson, Clerk of the House of Representatives.

In Minnesota it occurs only in committee of the whole and final passage; as a rule amendments occur only in committee of the whole.—Oscar Arneson, Chief Clerk of the House of Representatives.

In Rhode Island debate may occur only on final consideration and amendments may be made up to the taking of the vote.—C. H. Howland, Recording Clerk of the House of Representatives.

In Florida amendments may be introduced when the bill is on final passage but must be favored by a two-third vote to become part of the bill.—J. G. Kellum, Chief Clerk of the House of Representatives of Florida.

An example of good practice as to the stages at which bills may be amended is found in Rules of the House of Representatives of Ohio, revised February 14, 1913, Rules 53–62.

In New Jersey there is “No opportunity for debate until bill is in third reading and final passage” but amendments may be introduced on second reading.— M. F. Phillips, Clerk of the House of Assembly.

²⁸ The senate practice of amendment after engrossment is declared in Jefferson's Manual to be “an irregular and dangerous practice because in this way the paper which passes the senate has never been seen in the senate. In reducing numerous difficult and illegible amendments into the text the secretary may, with the most innocent intentions commit errors which can never again be corrected.” House Manual and Digest, 62d Congress, 2d sess., 421.

²⁹ An illustration of the looseness possible under of this practice came to the writer's attention in the legislative session of 1913. In a late night session a good roads bill was under consideration. It had been subjected to numerous amendments in committee and on second reading, all of which had been incorporated in the printed bill which was upon third reading stage. Several additional minor amendments were introduced and adopted by being sent to the clerk's desk and adopted without being incorporated in the printed bill. The measure then went to passage and the vote was declared. One of the friends of the bill then rose and pointed out that in one clause the units granted power to issue bonds for road improvements were described as “counties” while the intent was to give this power to both counties and towns. The failure to enter both might defeat part of the object of the measure. The house was evidently impatient for adjournment and the Speaker suggested that the member point out the change needed to the clerk at a later time. In the bill as it appears in the session laws both “towns and counties” are mentioned in each clause where they should appear. Perhaps no rule can be relied upon to check a house acting so irregularly, but the expedient of seeing the clerk to modify the measure actually passed has sinister possibilities.

³⁰ For example, Wisconsin, Ohio.

³¹ North Carolina.—J. Bryan Grimes, Secretary of State. Even this printing occurs only by special order of the house or senate.

³² J. G. Kellum, Chief Clerk of the House of Representatives of Florida.

³³ Thus in Minnesota. Amendments are not printed except on Special orders.—Oscar Arneson, Chief Clerk of the House of Representatives of Minnesota.

Amendments are usually not printed in Rhode Island. “There are few bills of any importance in our practice that do not come from committee in substitute form.”—C. H. Howland, Recording Clerk of the House of Representatives of Rhode Island. Some constitutions require printing before the vote on final passage.

³⁴ North Carolina.—J. Bryan Grimes, Secretary of State.

Not printed in Ohio except in special cases.—John R. Cassidy, Clerk of the House of Representatives of Ohio.

In Illinois all amendments adopted must before final passage be printed. Act would otherwise be unconstitutional. In practice all bills and amendments are printed before they are acted upon by the members—Wm. McKinley, Speaker of the House of Representatives of Illinois.

³⁵ Alabama (1901), 55. Shall publish journal “immediately after …. adjournment.”

Arizona (1910), 4, 2, 10. “Each house shall keep a journal.”

Arkansas (1874), 5, 12. Each house shall “from time to time publish the journal.”

California (1879), 4, 10. “Each house shall keep a journal and publish the same.”

Colorado, (1876), 5, 13. “Each house shall keep a journal …. and may in its discretion from time to time publish the same.”

Connecticut (1818), 3, 9. “Each house shall keep a journal …. and publish the same when required by one-fifth of its members.”

Delaware (1897), 2, 10. “Each house shall keep a journal …. and publish the same immediately after every session.”

Florida (1885), 3, 12. “Each house shall keep a journal.”

Georgia (1877), 3, 7, 4 and 5. Each house shall publish the journal “immediately after its adjournment.” “The original journal shall be preserved after publication in the office of the secretary of state, but there shall be no other record thereof.”

Idaho (1889), 3, 13. “Each house shall keep a journal of its proceedings.”

Illinois (1870), 4, 10. “Each house shall keep a journal of its proceedings which shall be published.”

Indiana (1851), 4, 12. “Each house shall keep a journal of its proceedings and publish the same.”

Iowa (1857), 3, 9. “Each house shall …. keep a journal of its proceedings and publish the same.”

Kansas (1859), 2, 10. “Each house shall keep and publish a journal of its proceedings.”

Kentucky (1890), 40. Shall publish journal “daily.”

Louisana (1898), 30. Journal shall be published “immediately after the close of the session, when practicable, the minutes of each day's session shall be printed and placed in the hands of the members on the day following.” Original after publication is preserved in the office of the secretary of state.

Maine (1819), 4, 3, 5. Journal to be published “from time to time.”

Maryland (1867), 3, 22. “Each house shall keep a journal …. and cause the same to be published.

Massachusetts (1780). No provisions.

Michigan (1908), 5, 16. “Each house shall keep a journal …. and publish the same.”

Minnesota (1857), 4, 5. Each house “shall keep journals of their proceedings and from time to time publish the same.”

Mississippi (1890), 55. “Both houses shall from time to time publish the journals of their proceedings.”

Missouri (1875), 4, 42. “Each house shall from time to time publish a journal of its proceedings.”

Montana (1889), 5, 12. “Each house shall keep a journal of its proceedings and may in its discretion from time to time publish the same.”

Nebraska (1875), 3, 8. “Each house shall keep a journal of its proceedings and publish them.” (sic.)

Nevada (1864), 4, 14. “Each house shall keep a journal of its own proceedings which shall be published.”

New Hampshire (1912), 2, 23. “Immediately after every adjournment or prorogation.”

New Jersey (1844), 4, 4, 4. “Each house shall keep a journal of its proceedings and from time to time publish the same.”

New Mexico (1910), 4, 12. “Each house shall keep a journal of its proceedings …. The original thereof shall be filed with the secretary of state at the close of the session and shall be printed and published under his authority.”

New York (1894), 3, 11. “Each house shall keep a journal of its proceedings and publish the same.”

North Carolina (1876), 2, 16. “Shall be printed and made public immediately after the adjournment of the general assembly.”

North Dakota (1889), 49. “Each house shall keep a journal of its proceedings.”

Ohio (1913), 2, 9. “Each house shall keep a correct journal of its proceedings.”

Oklahoma (1907), 5, 30. “Each house shall keep a journal of its proceedings and from time to time publish the same.”

Oregon (1857), 4, 13. “Each house shall keep a journal of its proceedings.”

Pennsylvania (1873), 2, 12. “Each house shall keep a journal of its proceedings and from time to time publish the same.”

Rhode Island (1842), 4, 8. “Each house shall keep a journal of its proceedings.” “No printing except in the daily official paper.”—C. H. Howland, Recording Clerk of the House of Representatives.

South Carolina (1895), 3, 22. “Immediately after adjournment.”

South Dakota (1889), 3, 13. “Each house shall keep a journal of its proceedings and publish the same from time to time.”

Tennessee (1870), 2, 21. “Each house shall keep a journal of its proceedings and publish it.”

Texas (1876), 3, 12. “Each house shall keep a journal of its proceedings and publish the same.”

Utah (1895), 6, 14. “Each house shall keep a journal of its proceedings which except in case of executive sessions shall be published.”

Vermont (1793), 2, 14. “The votes and proceedings …. shall be printed (when one-third of the members think it necessary) as soon as convenient after the end of each session.”

Virginia (1902), 49. “Each house shall keep a journal of its proceedings which shall be published from time to time.”

Washington (1889). No provision, though a journal is mentioned in connection with yeas and nays. 2, 21, and 22.

West Virginia (1872), 6, 41. “Each house shall keep a journal of its proceedings and cause the same to be published from time to time.”

Wisconsin (1848), 4, 10. Each house shall keep a journal of its proceedings and publish the same.

Wyoming (1889), 3, 13. “Each house shall keep a journal …. and may in its discretion from time to time publish the same.”

³⁶ J. Bryan Grimes, Secretary of State of North Carolina.

In Rhode Island the official journal is typewritten in a book from the original notes of the clerk. The original roll call sheets are inserted. “They do not look pretty but they are the ‘real thing’”.—C. H. Howland, Recording Clerk, House of Representatives.

Many States follow substantially this method. Even where the journal is printed in a bound volume this “official” journal is often a typewritten copy. Thus in Ohio.—J. R. Cassidy, Clerk of the House of Representatives.

In the first two sessions in Arizona the journal was kept in a loose leaf book. It is now printed daily. It was formerly read daily; it is now put on the member's desks in “galley” form and they point out corrections to the clerk after which it is advanced to its final printing.—L. F. Sweeting, Clerk of the House of Representatives.

In New Jersey all votes are pasted in.—M. F. Phillips, Clerk of House of Assembly.

³⁷ In the actual practice the journal was seldom if ever read in full. A motion usually was made …. upon the commencing of the readings …. that further reading be dispensed with, and the members invariably allowed this motion to prevail.”—Wm. McKinley, Speaker of the House of Representatives of Illinois. This seems to be the standard followed in most States.

³⁸ Oscar Arneson, Chief Clerk of the House of Representatives of Minnesota. Similar practice in Florida.—J. H. Kellum, Chief Clerk of the House of Representatives of Florida.

C. H. Howland, Recording Clerk of the House of Representatives, Rhode Island.

³⁹ State constitutional requirements as to recording yeas and nays.

Alabama (1901), 55. “At the request of one tenth of the members present.”

Arizona (1910), 4, 2, 10. “At the request of two members.”

Arkansas (1874), 5, 12. “At the desire of any five members.” 5, 22. “Always taken on final passage of any bill.”

California (1879), 4, 10. “At the desire of any three members.” 4, 15. Always taken on final passage.

Colorado (1876), 5, 13. “At the desire of any two members.” 5, 22. Always taken on final passage.

Connecticut (1818), 3, 9. “At the desire of one-fifth of those present.”

Delaware (1897), 2, 10. “At the desire of any member.” Always taken on final passage.

Florida (1885), 3, 12. “At the desire of any five members.” 3, 17. Always taken on final passage.

Georgia (1877), 3, 7, 6. “At the desire of one-fifth of the members present.” 3, 7,12. Always taken on final passage of money bills. 3, 7, 21. Always taken where constitution requires a two-thirds vote.

Idaho (1889), 3, 13. “At the request of any three members present.” 3, 15. Always taken on final passage.

Illinois (1870), 4, 10. “In the senate at the request of two members and in the house at the request of five members.”

Indiana (1851), 4, 12. “At the request of any two members” except on adjournment which requires request of one-tenth. 4, 18. Always taken on final passage.

Iowa (1857), 3, 10. “At the desire of any two members present.” 3, 17. Always taken on final passage.

Kansas (1859), 2, 10. Always taken on final passage.

Kentucky (1890), 40. “At the desire of any two members elected.” 46. Always taken on final passage.

Louisiana (1898), 36.- “At the desire of one fifth of the members elected.” 39. Always taken on final passage.

Maine (1819), 4, 3, 5. “At the desire of one-fifth of those present.”

Maryland (1867), 3, 22. “At the call of any five.… in the House of Delegates or one in the senate.” 3, 28. Always taken on final passage.

Massachusetts (1780). No provisions.

Michigan (1908), 5, 16. “At the request of one-fifth of the members present.” 5, 23. Always taken on final passage.

Minnesota (1857), 4, 13. Always taken on final passage.

Mississippi (1890), 55. “At the request of one tenth of the members present.” Always taken on final passage.

Missouri (1875), 4, 42. “At the motion of any two members.” 4, 31. Always taken on final passage.

Montana (1889), 5, 12. “At the request of any two members.” 5, 24. Always taken on final passage.

Nebraska (1875), 3, 8. “At the desire of any two members.” 3, 10. Always taken on final passage.

Nevada (1864), 4, 14. “At the desire of any three members present.” 4, 18. Always taken on final passage.

New Hampshire (1912), 2, 23. “Upon motion made by any one member.”

New Jersey (1844), 4, 4, 4. “At the desire of one-fifth of those present.” 4, 4, 6. Always taken on final pasage.

New Mexico (1910), 4, 12. “At the request of one-fifth of the members present.” 4, 17. Always taken on final passage.

New York (1894), 3, 15. Always upon final passage. 3, 25. Taken on money bills.

North Carolina (1876), 2, 26. “Upon motion made and seconded in either house by one fifth of the members present.” 2, 14. Always taken on second and third reading.

North Dakota (1889), 49. “At the request of one-sixth of those present.” 65. Always taken on final passage.

Ohio (1913), 2, 9. “At the desire of any two members and on the passage of every bill.”

Oklahoma (1907), 5, 30. “At the desire of one-fifteenth of those present.” 5, 35. Always taken on final passage.

Oregon (1857), 4, 13. “At the request of any two members.” 4, 19. Always taken on final passage.

Pennsylvania (1857), 2, 12. “At the desire of any two” (members). 3, 4. Always taken on final passage.

Rhode Island (1842), 4, 8. “At the desire of one-fifth of those present.”

South Carolina (1895), 3, 22. “At the desire of ten members of the house or five members of the senate.”

South Dakota (1889), 3, 13. “At the desire of one-sixth of those present.” 3, 18. Always taken upon final passage.

Tennessee (1870), 2, 21. “At the request of any five” members and on final passage of all of general character or making appropriations.

Texas (1876), 3, 12. “At the desire of any three members present.”

Utah (1895), 6, 114. “At the request of five members.” 6, 22. Always taken on final passage.

Vermont (1793), 2, 14. “When required by any member.”

Virginia (1902), 49. “At the desire of one-fifth of those present.” 50. Always taken on final passage.

Washington (1889), 2, 21. “On the demand of one-sixth of the members present.” 2, 22. Always taken upon final passage.

West Virginia (1872), 6, 41. “If called for by one-tenth of those present.”

Wisconsin (1848), 4, 20. “At the requestof one-sixth of those present.”

Wyoming (1889), 3, 13. “At the request of any two members.” 3, 25. Always taken on final passage.

⁴⁰ North Carolina.

⁴¹ Constitution of New York, 1894; 3, 15.

⁴² Constitution of New York, 1894; 3, 26.

⁴³ New York Evening Post, November 22, 1913.

⁴⁴ J. Bryan Grimes, Secretary of State, North Carolina.