3



  It will be observed that the House had spenit near five
months and the Senate had spenit about six weeks in the
work upon this bill, at a cost to the State for the time con-
sumed at a conservative estimate, as we believe, of 75,000
  That this bill should be passed in time for the assess-
meiit to l)egin on September 15th was holdinig the Legisla-
ture in session at a cost of about 1,000 per day.
  From four to six of the Senators who had opposed this
bill throughout from the adoption of the Senate amend-
meiits now undertook to prevent any action by the Senate,
and by delav tactics succeeded for that daY, notwithstand-
ing there were seventeen members of the Senate out of
the twenty-one or twenty-two in attendance that were
anxious to speedily conclude the work on this bill and
adjourn.
  Again, wvlen the Senate met on the niext day, time four or
five Senators resumned their (ielay tactics, but in this en-
gagement the seveniteeni Senlators succeeded, niotwitlhstand-
ing the extreme tactics resorted to by the four or five, and
refused to recede andl amed, by resol utioim, a conference
cornmitttee on the lart of the Senate aid asked the House
to appoint a like committee.
  The evident purpose of the minority was either to (lefeat
the passage of the bill or eventually procuire the appoint-
ment of a conference committee in the Senate that would
be opposed to certain important amendments that a very
large. mnajority of the members of tle Senate had voted for
and some of which will be noticed later on in this state-
me it.
  It is a well settled proposition in parliamentary law that
a conference committee must be appointed that will voice
the views of the majority of the body from wvhich they are
appointed.
  Mr. Cushing, in his "Law and Practice of Legislative
Assemblies," says: "A committee of conference is not a