¹ Senate Resolution 5 provided that “if at any time a motion signed by sixteen senators, to bring to a close the debate upon any pending measure is presented to the senate, the presiding officer shall at once state the motion to the Senate, and one hour after the senate meets on the following calendar day but one, he shall lay the motion before the senate” and, if a quorum is present, submit without debate the question: “Is it the sense of the senate that the debate shall be brought to a close?” If this question receives a two-thirds affirmative vote, then the measure is the unfinished business of the senate to the exclusion of all other business. No senator is entitled to speak more than one hour; except by unanimous consent no amendment is in order unless presented before the motion to bring the debate to a close; dilatory motions will not be considered, and points of order are decided without debate.

² It is worthy of note that the King, in his Speech from the Throne on the opening of the English Parliament (February 11) spoke of the “large number of measures affecting the social and economic well-being of the nation” that “await your consideration.” It was of the utmost importance, he said, “that their provisions should be examined and, if possible, agreed upon and carried into effect with all expedition. With this object in view My Government will invite the consideration of the House of Commons to entertain proposals for the simplification of the procedure of that house which, it is hoped, will enable delays to be avoided and give its members an increasing opportunity of taking an effective part in the work of legislation.”

The proposals of the government were very drastic and were accepted by the Louse with unfeigned reluctance. They included the increase of the standing committees from four to six, with much more work to be done in committee than has hitherto been the case, and a form of closure known as “kangaroo,” under which the speaker has the power to select amendments which the house may discuss. Until March 31 no bills except government measures were to be introduced, and the speaking privileges of private members are to be curtailed. The government proposed to cut down the discussion of supply—the historic raison d'etre of the house—from twenty to twelve days, but on this point was forced to abandon its position. Measures have been proposed making the reelection of ministers unnecessary and creating ministries of health and communications. The whole problem of legislative procedure—in the lords as well as in the commons—and of administrative reform will have to be dealt with shortly, although the emergency is by no means so acute as it is in the United States.

³ The precedents are collected in Senate Document No. 104, 57th Congress, 1st Session, a reprint of an article by Lodge, Senator on “The Treaty Making Power of the Senate,” Scribner's Magazine, January, 1902.Google Scholar See also Corwin, The President's Control of Foreign Relations.

⁴ C. 432, 39 Stat. at L. 675: Hammer v. Dagenhart, 247 U. S. 529.

⁵ Cf. the article by Hough, Judge entitled “Covert Legislation and the Con stitution,” 30 Harvard Law Review 801 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Veazie Bank v. Fenno, 8 Wall. 533 (1869); McCray v. United States, 195 U. S. 27 (1903); and U. S. v. Jin Fuey Moy, 241 U. S. 394 (1916). Oleomargarine, state bank notes, phosphorous matches, transactions in cotton futures, and drugs are the precedents for the child labor rider.

⁶ The Harrison Drug Act, 38 Stat. at L. 785.

⁷ The house proposed to tax salaries received from the states and minor political subdivisions. The senate ignored the subject and left it to administrative determination as to whether such taxes are constitutional, with the result that the state exemption still holds. The act for the first time imposes the income tax on the compensation of the President and United States judges, and thus raises a constitutional question.

⁸ During the session more than 3000 bills were introduced in the house and nearly 500 in the senate. The exact figures for the whole Congress are as follows:

Number of House Bills introduced 16,239

Number of Senate Bills introduced 5,680

Number of House Joint Resolutions 445

Number of Senate Joint Resolutions 230

Number of Public Laws approved 349

Number of Public Resolutions approved 56

Number of Private Laws approved 48

Number of House Committee Reports 1,187

Number of Senate Committee Reports 790

I am indebted for these figures to Mr. W. Ray Loomis, Assistant Superintendent of the House Document Room and the compiler of the Monthly Compendium and Weekly Compendium of the War Congress.

⁹ A Public Buildings Bill was reported without passing the house (H. R. 16129). Four pension bills were passed, making a total of twenty-eight for the Congress.

A great many private bills were included in the omnibus pension laws as follows:

¹⁰ There were seven bills which passed both houses but which died in conference or through failure to agree to conference reports: H. R. 5559, relating to projects under the Carey Land Act; H. R. 7236, amending the act permitting rights of way through canals, reservoirs, and tramroads; H. R. 10851, providing for the disposal of liquor in the possession of court officers; H. R. 13277, District of Columbia Appropriations; H. R. 14746, Indian appropriations; S. 1419, Water-power bill; and S. 2812, Oil and gas leasing bill.

The President exercised his right of veto on five occasions, all during the second session. The measures which were sent back to Congress—none passed over the veto—were as follows: H. R. 7237, Post Office appropriation bill (because of the provision which continued pneumatic mail tubes); H. R. 9054, Agricultural appropriation bill (because of the provision which fixed the price of 1918 wheat at $2.40 per bushel); H. R. 10358, Legislative, executive and judicial appropriation bill (because of the rider requiring government employees to work eight instead of seven hours a day; S. 2917, to appoint an army chaplain for every 1,200 soldiers; and S. J. Res. 159. extending the time for the relinquishment of government control of short-line railroads.

¹¹ In connection with this question of legislative procedure an investigation of how Congress spends its time would be very interesting. It is well enough to point out the delays on various measures, but what was done in the meanwhile? Ac investigator studying the Congressional Record with this purpose in view would have an exceedingly tedious and enervating task, but the results would be very valuable. Such a study has been made for the British Parliament for the years 1904–1908 by an anonymous writer, An Analysis of the System of Government Throughout the British Empire (Macmillan, 1912). The Round Table for September, 1918 (Number 32), contains a very interesting article on this subject, “The Better Government of the United Kingdom.”

It may be noted that the Sixty-fifth Congress was in session for 87 per cent of the two years. From March 4, 1917, to March 4, 1919, there were only 96 days out of a total of 728 when Congress was not in session. Its length is exceeded by only one other Congress—the Sixty-third—which had twenty more days.