<DOC>
[Hinds Precedents -- Volume IV]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access]
[DOCID: f:hinds_ciii.wais]

 
                             Chapter CIII.

                      SELECT AND JOINT COMMITTEES.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

    1. Nature and duration of select committees. Sections 4393-
     4400.\1\
    2. Select committees created by motion to refer. Sections 
     4401, 4402.\2\
    3. Reports and dissolution of select committees. Sections 
     4403-4407.
    4. Creation and use of joint committees. Sections 4408-
     4418.\3\
    5. Joint committees created by statute. Section 4419.
    6. Duration of joint select committees. Section 4420.
    7. Instruction of a joint committee. Sections 4421-4423.
    8. Procedure and membership. Sections 4424-4435.
    9. Commissions created by law. Sections 4436-4447.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

  4393. A select committee, when created by the House, is additional to 
and apart from the regular standing committees provided in the rules.--
On February 25, 1882,\4\ Mr. Thomas B. Reed, of Maine, as a privileged 
question, reported from the Committee on Rules the following 
resolution:

  Resolved, That a select committee of nine Members be appointed, to 
whom shall be referred all petitions, bills, and resolves asking for 
the extension of suffrage to women or the removal of their legal 
disabilities.

  Mr. William M. Springer, of Illinois, made the point of order that 
the resolution changed Rule X \5\ by increasing the number of 
committees therein named.
  The Speaker \6\ overruled the point of order on the ground that the 
resolution provided only for the appointment of a select committee and 
did not increase or decrease the number of standing committees provided 
for in Rule X.
  4394. A select committee expires at the end of a session, unless 
continued by order of the House or revived by the reference of a matter 
to
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
  \1\ See also sections 5521-5528 of Vol. V.
  \2\ See also sections 5569 et seq. of Vol. V.
  \3\ Two Houses sometimes appoint separate committees to confer and 
report. (Sec. 1936 of Vol. III and sec. 3 of Vol. I.)
  A joint committee of investigation. (Sec. 1763 of Vol. 111.)
  The joint committee of 1821 to consider the admission of Missouri to 
the Union. (Sec. 4471 of this volume.)
  The joint committee of 1877 to consider the conduct of the electoral 
count. (Sec. 1953 of Vol. III.)
  \4\ First session Forty-seventh Congress, Journal, p. 668; Record, 
pp. 1447, 1448.
  \5\ For this rule see section 4448 of this volume.
  \6\ J. Warren Keifer, of Ohio, Speaker.
                                                            Sec. 4395
it by the House.--On January 22, 1877,\1\ Mr. Speaker Randall stated 
his opinion as to the duration of a select committee:

  Under parliamentary rule a select committee expires at the end of a 
session of Congress; the appointment does not run through two sessions, 
as in the case with other committees, yet it has been uniformly held 
that the reference of any matter to a select committee that has expired 
has the effect to revive that committee, which is substantially the 
same as the creation of a new committee.

  4395. On May 30,1866,\2\ the House recommitted a bill to the Select 
Committee on the Wax Debts of the Loyal States, and at the same time 
ordered, on motion of Mr. James G. Blaine, of Maine, that the committee 
be continued as organized, with leave to report during the next session 
by bill or otherwise.
  4396. On December 4, 1873,\3\ at the beginning of a Congress, the 
Senate continuing by motion certain select committees.
  4397. Select committees are quite commonly designated as for the 
Congress by the resolution creating them. Thus, an instance on December 
19, 1885.\4\
  4398. On July 7, 1838,\5\ the House granted leave to two select 
committees ``to adjourn at the close of the present session, and to 
resume their investigation and report at the next session of 
Congress.'' The report would be made at a session of the same Congress.
  4399. On June 25, 1860,\6\ a message having been received from the 
President protesting against certain action of the House, it was--

  Ordered, That the said message be referred to a select committee of 
five Members, who shall report to the House at the next session of 
Congress.

  4400. The continuance of a select committee revives all the business 
before it.--On May 26, 1868,\7\ the House agreed to a resolution 
reviving the functions of the managers of the impeachment of the 
President so that they might continue the investigation of the charges 
that corrupt means had been used to influence the action of the court 
of impeachment.
  Mr. Charles A. Eldridge, of Wisconsin, made the point of order that 
the revival of the committee did not give it jurisdiction of the matter 
which it was considering, as the adjournment of the court of 
impeachment terminated the functions of the managers.
  The Speaker said: \8\

  The Chair overrules the point of order on the ground that the 
continuance of any committee will revive all of its business. This has 
been the uniform decision of all Speakers and Congresses. For example, 
a special committee which expires with a session, revived at a 
succeeding session of that Congress, has all of its business revived, 
and has the same jurisdiction of business as was authorized by the 
original resolution.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
  \1\ Second session Forty-fourth Congress, Record, p. 815.
  \2\ First session Thirty-ninth Congress, Journal, p. 775.
  \3\ First session Forty-third Congress, Record, p. 57.
  \4\ First session Forty-ninth Congress, Journal, p. 129.
  \5\ Second session Twenty-fifth Congress, Journal, p. 1274.
  \6\ First session Thirty-sixth Congress, Journal, p. 1225.
  \7\ Second session Fortieth Congress, Globe, p. 2590.
  \8\ Schuyler Colfax, of Indiana, Speaker.
Sec. 4401
  4401. Instance wherein a select committee was authorized by the 
adoption by the House of a motion to refer.--On March 11, 1904,\1\ the 
House was considering a resolution providing for an investigation of 
the conduct of certain Members of the House in relation to the Post-
Office Department. This resolution had been reported from the Committee 
on the Post-Office and the Post-Roads.
  Mr. Samuel W. McCall, of Massachusetts, submitted the following 
motion, which was agreed to:

  To commit the pending report of the Committee on the Post-office and 
Post-Roads and all accompanying papers and communications contained in 
House Report No. 1395, so far as same relates to Members of the House, 
to a select committee of seven, to be appointed by the Speaker, with 
instructions to consider said report and said papers and 
communications, so far as they relate to Members, and the origin of the 
said papers and communications, and that said select committee be 
authorized hilly to investigate the same, to hear Members and other 
persons named in said report, and any official of the Post-Office 
Department in respect to matters affecting Members of the House 
contained in said report, papers, and communications, and as soon as 
may be to report to the House the result of said investigation; and 
that said select committee is authorized to sit during the sessions of 
the House, examine witnesses on oath, compel the attendance of 
witnesses and the production of papers, and to employ such clerical 
assistance as may be necessary, and have such printing done as the 
needs of the committee may require.

  4402. A motion to refer may specify that the reference be to a select 
committee of a stated number of Members, and may endow this committee 
with power to send for persons and papers.
  Instance wherein a President's message was referred on motion to a 
select committee.
  On January 24, 1877,\2\ Mr. Fernando Wood, of New York, submitted the 
following resolution, and demanded the previous question thereon:

  Resolved, That the message of the President and the accompanying 
documents, in answer to the resolution of the House calling for copies 
of all dispatches, orders, etc., relating to the use of troops in the 
States of Virginia, South Carolina, Louisiana, and Florida since the 
1st August last, be referred to a select committee of eleven members, 
with instructions to report whether there has been any exercise of 
authority not warranted by the Constitution and laws of the United 
States in the use of the troops in the States referred to within the 
period stated, for which the President is justly responsible, with 
power to send for persons and papers, to administer oaths, and to 
report at any time.

  Mr. Nathaniel P. Banks, of Massachusetts, made the point of order 
that the last clause of the resolution, viz, ``to send for persons and 
papers,'' changed the rules of the House, and was not now in order.
  After debate, the Speaker \3\ overruled the point of order, on the 
ground that on the motion to commit or refer it was in the power of the 
House to commit or refer with instructions, and that conferring that 
power upon a committee was merely directing its mode of procedure. The 
Speaker said:

  The Chair desires to read from the Manual in connection with this 
point:
  ``A motion to commit may be amended by the addition of instructions, 
also by striking out one committee and inserting another.''
  That is found decided in various places in the Journals of the House:
  ``A division of the question is not in order on a motion to commit 
with instructions, or on the different branches of instructions.'' 
(Journals, first session Seventeenth Congress, p. 507; first session 
Thirty-first Congress, pp. 1395, 1397; first session Thirty-second 
Congress, p. 611.)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
  \1\ Second session Fifty-eighth Congress, Record, pp. 3151, 3153.
  \2\ Second session Forty-fourth Congress, Journal, p. 297; Record, p. 
926.
  \3\ Samuel J. Randall, of Pennsylvania, Speaker.
                                                            Sec. 4403
  And further on in the Manual it is stated that ``on a motion to 
commit the whole question is open to debate,'' and therefore open to 
instructions and open to amendments. The Chair thinks the House, having 
the power to commit a subject to a committee, has the power to instruct 
such committee how they shall proceed; and the Chair, if he had time, 
thinks he could show many instances of such action by the House. The 
question as to the right to report at any time is a very different one, 
because the question of the right to report at any time changes the 
order of committee reports and interferes with the rights of committees 
in that respect. Therefore he holds that the rule of the House which 
recognizes the order of reports from committees would be interfered 
with by permitting a special committee to report at any time, and such 
change of the rule would require a suspension of the rules.
  The Chair overrules the point of order raised by the gentleman from 
Massachusetts (Mr. Banks) that it is not within the power of the House 
to commit with instructions.

  Mr. Banks appealed from the decision of the Chair in so far as he 
decided that that part of the pending resolution which grants the power 
``to send for persons and papers'' was in order.
  The Speaker stated the question to be, Shall the decision of the 
Chair stand as the judgment of the House?
  Mr. Cox moved that the appeal be laid on the table; and the question 
being put, it was decided in the affirmative, yeas 146, nays 78.
  The resolution was then agreed to by the House.
  4403. When a select committee reports in full on the subject 
committed, it is thereby dissolved; but it may be revived by a vote.--
Jefferson's Manual, in Section XXVII, provides:

  The report being made, the committee is dissolved, and can act no 
more without a new power. (Scob., 51.) But it may be revived by a vote, 
and the same matter recommitted to them.\1\ (4 Grey, 361.)
  4404. A select committee that has reported finally and become 
dissolved may be revived as to all its original powers by the action of 
the House in referring in open House a new matter to it.
  Where a matter is recommitted with instructions the committee must 
confine itself within the instructions.
  Where a committee had made a report which exceeded its instructions 
the Speaker ruled out the excess portion, but permitted the remainder 
of the report to stand.
  On June 17, 1862,\2\ Mr. James K. Moorhead, of Pennsylvania, under a 
call for reports from select committees, having proposed to report a 
joint resolution from the Select Committee on a National Armory, Mr. 
Charles Delano, of Massachusetts, made the point of order that the 
committee having heretofore made its report was thereby dissolved, and 
no matter having subsequently been referred to it by a vote of the 
House, it was not competent for the committee to make a report.
  The Speaker \3\ made inquiry as to whether, since the first report 
had been made, anything had been referred to the select committee in 
open House. Ref-
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
  \1\ This refers to special committees. The standing committees 
continue. On January 30, 1823 (second session Seventeenth Congress, 
Annals, p. 739), Mr. Speaker Barbour said: ``It was unquestionably true 
that the select committee, having made a report in full upon the 
subject referred to it, was, ipso facto, discharged from further 
consideration of the subject.''
  \2\ Second session Thirty-seventh Congress, Journal, p. 874; Globe, 
pp. 2764, 2790.
  \3\ Galusha A. Grow, of Pennsylvania, Speaker.
Sec. 4404
erence of petitions under the rules was not sufficient to revive a 
select committee. No one being able to specify the reference in open 
House of any matter to the select committee, the Chair said he should 
sustain the point of order.
  Mr. Moorhead having appealed, the decision of the Chair was 
sustained, and the report was ruled to be out of order.
  Then Mr. Thomas D. Eliot, of Massachusetts, from the Select Committee 
on the Confiscation of the Property of Rebels, etc., to whom was 
recommitted the bill of the House (H. R. 472) ``to free from servitude 
the slaves of rebels engaged in abetting the existing rebellion against 
the Government of the United States,'' with instructions to report the 
same with a certain amendment in the nature of a substitute therefor, 
reported the same with the amendment, and also proposed to report an 
amendment in the nature of a substitute for the amendment.
  Mr. John S. Phelps, of Missouri, made the point of order that the 
committee were limited, by the specific instructions of the House, to 
the report of the bill with the prescribed amendment, and that it was 
not competent for the committee to report any additional amendments.
  The Speaker said:

  The Chair will state that this being a case of recommitment with 
specific instructions, the Chair does not think it would revive the 
general powers of the committee. The Chair is satisfied, upon further 
consideration, that the committee could not make any report relative to 
the matter, except in strict conformity with their instructions.

  The House acquiesced in this decision.
  On the same day, the same question being under consideration, Mr. 
Eliot proposed to submit an amendment, in the nature of a substitute, 
to the amendment reported, under instructions, by the committee.
  Mr. Robert Mallory, of Kentucky, made the point of order that the 
chairman of the select committee having reported the bill and 
amendments by instruction of the committee, and the amendments having 
been decided out of order by the Speaker, it is not in order for the 
chairman to withdraw the amendments, the bill and amendments being the 
report of the committee.
  The Speaker overruled the point of order, saying:

  The gentleman from Massachusetts sent the bill to the table, with 
these amendments, in the nature of a substitute, and the point of order 
being raised, the Chair ruled them out, because the report was not as 
the committee were instructed to report it. The committee report the 
bill with a substitute, to which the gentleman from Massachusetts, as 
an individual, moves certain amendments. The Chair, therefore, 
overrules the point of order raised by the gentleman from Kentucky.

  Mr. Mallory having appealed, on the next day, June 19, the question 
came up and the Speaker stated the case as follows:

  When the select committees were called yesterday the gentleman from 
Massachusetts [Mr. Eliot] reported, from the Select Committee on the 
Confiscation of Rebel Property, a bill, with a substitute, and to that 
substitute, he stated, the committee had instructed him to report 
sundry amendments in the nature of a substitute, satisfactory to the 
friends of the bill, naming some of them. The gentleman from Kentucky, 
on the right of the Chair, Mr. Wickliffe, raised the question of order 
that the committee, acting under special instructions from the House, 
and being a select committee, could not report an amendment to a 
substitute which they were instructed to report. The Chair sustained 
the point of order, so that the amendments which the gentleman from 
Massachusetts proposed to report from the committee were ruled out of 
order. The gentleman from Kentucky, Mr. Mallory, raised another
                                                            Sec. 4405
point; that the chairman of the committee being instructed to report a 
bill with amendments, and those amendments ruled out of order, the 
report itself should be rejected. The Chair overruled that point. From 
that decision the gentleman took an appeal.
  With the indulgence of the House the Chair will have read an extract 
from Jefferson's Manual, not as application only to this point, but for 
the information of the House in reference to procedure in amending 
bills:
  ``The committee may not erase, interline, or blot the bill itself, 
but must, in a paper by itself, set down the amendments, stating the 
words which are to be inserted or omitted, and where, by reference to 
page, line, and word of the bill.''
  The Chair desires to have read from the same Manual an extract in 
reference to the powers of select committees, and a construction of the 
same from Barclay's Manual:
  ``The report being made, the committee is dissolved and can act no 
more without a new power. But it may be revived by a vote, and the same 
matter recommitted to them. This evidently refers to a select 
committee, and under the practice of the House a motion to recommit 
decided affirmatively has the effect of reviving the committee.''
  * * * The vote in this case restricted the committee to a particular 
act. * * * The only question now for the House to decide is whether the 
decision of the Chair shall stand as the judgment of the House upon the 
point of order that the committee, having directed one of its members 
to report a substitute, with amendments, and the amendments being ruled 
out of order, the committee can not make a report, which, I believe, is 
a statement of the point of order raised by the gentleman from 
Kentucky, Mr. Mallory.

  Mr. Mallory here stated that his point of order was made in writing 
and the Speaker had stated it correctly, except as to the point that 
the chairman had no right to make a report without further consultation 
with or authority from the committee itself.
  The Speaker said:

  The Chair understands the point to be that where the amendments are 
ruled out of order the substitute alone would not be the report of the 
committee. The Chair would state, with the indulgence of the House, 
that, by the rule he had first read, committees must make all their 
amendments on a separate piece of paper. They are, therefore, reported 
distinctly by themselves and may, therefore, be rejected without 
rejecting the bill to which they are amendments; but the Chair decided 
that the committee could not report them, but that, nevertheless, the 
bill which they did report was before the House.

  The appeal does not seem to have been decided, as modifications were 
made in the amendment and it was adopted and the bill was passed, the 
point of order being lost sight of.
  4405. On February 25, 1863,\1\ Mr. Albert S. White, of Indiana, from 
the Select Committee on Emancipation, reported a bill (H. R. 777) to 
aid the State of Missouri in the emancipation of the slaves therein.
  Mr. Clement L. Vallandigham, of Ohio, made the point of order that 
the committee, being a select committee, and having some time before 
reported, and having been discharged, and only revived \2\ by having 
the House bill with the Senate's amendment referred to it, its report 
now must be confined to that bill, and amendments to, or a substitute 
for, it; and that no reference of the subject generally to it, prior to 
its first report and consequent discharge, could authorize it to report 
a new bill disconnected from the bill and the Senate's amendment 
afterwards referred to it.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
  \1\ Third session Thirty-seventh Congress, Journal, pp. 487, 489; 
Globe, p. 1295.
  \2\ See section 4403 for rule of parliamentary law relating to 
discharge of a select committee.
Sec. 4406
  The Speaker \1\ overruled the point of order on the ground that even 
if the committee had been dissolved by the former report (which he did 
not admit to be the case with the present committee), the recommitment 
of the House bill and Senate's amendment had revived it with all the 
powers it possessed before said report, and its right to report a new 
bill, based upon the President's message heretofore referred to it, was 
as perfect now as it ever was.
  Mr. Elijah H. Norton, of Missouri, having taken an appeal, the appeal 
was laid on the table by a vote of 79 yeas to 27 nays.
  4406. At the first meeting of a select committee the resolution of 
the House creating it and defining its duties is spread on its 
Journal.--On March 20, 1860,\2\ the committee appointed to investigate 
the subject of Executive influence in legislation, corruption in 
elections, etc., met, and the chairman first laid before the committee 
an attested copy from the Clerk's office of the resolution creating the 
committee and defining its duties. This was ordered to be spread on the 
journal of the committee.
  4407. In the earlier practice a motion establishing certain select 
committees was held to be privileged at the time of organization of the 
House.--On December 10, 1841,\3\ Mr. Millard Fillmore, of New York, 
submitted the following:

  Resolved, That, for the further organization of the House, in 
addition to the standing committees for the session, the following be 
appointed, to consist of nine members each, to wit: A select committee 
on the plan of finance recommended in the President's message; a select 
committee on the apportionment of Representatives to Congress; a select 
committee on the Smithsonian legacy.

  Mr. Charles H. Atherton, of New Hampshire, objected to the reception 
of the resolution because it was not in accordance with the routine of 
business established by the rules.
  The Speaker \4\ decided that it was in order to move the resolution, 
since it related to the organization of the House.\5\
  An appeal being taken, the decision of the Chair was affirmed, yeas 
104, nays 90.
  4408. Joint committees are used infrequently in the legislative 
practice of the two Houses of Congress.--Joint committees are used 
infrequently in the practice of the two Houses of Congress.\6\ 
Occasionally a joint select committee is created for a special purpose. 
Three standing committees, those on Printing, the Library, and Enrolled 
Bills, are mentioned in the rules as joint committees. The committees 
on Printing and the Library are joint committees in relation to certain 
administrative functions conferred by statute; but rarely act in a 
legislative capacity as joint committees. When the Senate revised its 
rules in 1877, on January 16,
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
  \1\ Galusha A. Grow, of Pennsylvania, Speaker.
  \2\ First session Thirty-sixth Congress, House Report No. 648, pp. 
59, 60.
  \3\ Second session Twenty-seventh Congress, Journal, pp. 33, 34; 
Globe, p. 12.
  \4\ John White, of Kentucky, Speaker.
  \5\ The standing committees had not yet been appointed for the 
session, the practice then being to appoint them each session.
  \6\ Joint committees have, however, exercised important functions at 
times, as, for instance, the Joint Committee on the Conduct of the War 
and the Joint Committee on Reconstruction.
                                                            Sec. 4409
it agreed to a rule empowering the committees on Printing, Library, and 
Enrolled Bills to act conjointly with the similar House committees.\1\
  4409. A joint committee should be provided for by a concurrent and 
not a joint resolution, and the resolution should not prescribe rules 
for the proceedings of either House.--On December 4, 1865,\2\ the House 
agreed to a resolution, joint in form, for the appointment of a joint 
committee on reconstruction. The resolution also provided that all 
papers relating to the seceding States should be referred to the 
committee without debate. The Senate, after a very thorough discussion 
of the subject, decided to amend the resolution so that it should be 
concurrent and not joint in form, in order to obviate the necessity of 
its signature by the President, thereby becoming a law. They also 
struck out the provision about reference, in order that each House 
might control its own proceedings. As amended by the Senate, which form 
was concurred in by the House, the resolution was:

  Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That a joint committee of fifteen Members shall be appointed, nine of 
whom shall be Members of the House and six Members of the Senate, who 
shall inquire into the condition of the States which formed the so-
called Confederate States of America, and report whether they, or any 
of them, are entitled to be represented in either House of Congress, 
with leave to report at any time by bill or otherwise.

  4410. Form of concurrent resolution creating a joint committee.\3\
  Instance wherein the Senate insisted on an equal representation on a 
joint committee.
  On June 25, 1906,\4\ the Senate returned to the House the following 
concurrent resolution, which it had passed with an amendment making the 
number of Senators on the proposed committee five instead of four:

  Resolved by the Howe of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That 
a joint special committee be appointed, consisting of four Senators, to 
be appointed by the Vice-President, and five Members of the House of 
Representatives, to be appointed by the Speaker, to examine, consider, 
and submit to Congress recommendations upon the revision and 
codification of laws prepared by the statutory revision commission 
heretofore authorized to revise and codify the laws of the United 
States; and that the said joint committee be authorized to sit during 
the recess of Congress and to employ necessary clerical and other 
assistance; to order such printing and binding done as may be required 
in the transaction of its business, and to incur such expense as may be 
deemed necessary, all such expense to be paid in equal proportions from 
the contingent funds of the Senate and House of Representatives.

  The House concurred in the Senate amendment.
  4411. When a joint committee is authorized by simple resolution, the 
resolution itself does not have the concurrent action of the two 
Houses.--On April 25, 1828,\5\ the House agreed to this resolution:

  Resolved, That a committee on the part of the House of 
Representatives be appointed to join such committee as the Senate may 
appoint,\6\ on their part, to consider and report what business is 
necessary to be enacted at the present session, and to fix on, and 
recommend, the day on which the President of the Senate and Speaker of 
the House of Representatives shall adjourn the present session of 
Congress.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
  \1\ Second session Forty-fourth Congress, Record, p. 656.
  \2\ First session Thirty-ninth Congress, Journal, pp. 10, 60; Globe, 
pp. 6, 24-30, 46, 47.
  \3\ See also section 4409.
  \4\ First session Fifty-ninth Congress, Record, pp. 9088, 9173.
  \5\ First session Twentieth Congress, Journal, p. 613.
  \6\ Joint committees are still created by resolutions of this kind 
for certain ceremonies like notifying the President that Congress is 
about to adjourn; but generally the concurrent form is used.
Sec. 4412
  In the Senate \1\ a question arose as to whether the proper course 
would be to concur in this resolution, but the Chair \2\ decided that 
concurrence in such a resolution was not in accordance with the former 
practice. The appointment of a committee would be the proper act of 
concurrence.
  4412. Sometimes the two Houses, by concurrent action, join two of 
their standing committees and constitute them a joint committee.--On 
February 6, 1865,\3\ on motion of Mr. Elihu B. Washburne, of Illinois, 
the House agreed to the following:

  Resolved (the Senate concurring), That the Committee on Commerce on 
the part of the Senate be joined to the Committee of Commerce on the 
part of the House in the investigation which said Committee on Commerce 
on the part of the House are now engaged in under the resolutions of 
the House of January 20, 1865, and January 25, 1865, in regard to trade 
with States in rebellion, to constitute a joint committee for the 
purpose of completing said investigation; and that the said joint 
committee have the same powers as the Committee of Commerce of the 
House now has on the subject of said investigation.

  The Senate agreed to this, and on March 1, the committee reported a 
bill.
  4413. On July 17, 1876,\4\ the Senate's resolution for a committee to 
investigate Chinese immigration was made the basis for a resolution 
agreed to by the House for a committee to investigate the same subject, 
``conjointly with said Senate committee or otherwise.''
  4414. On March 29, 1869,\5\ by concurrent resolution of the two 
Houses, the Committee on Audit and Control of the Contingent Expenses 
of the Senate, and the Committee on Accounts of the House, were made a 
joint committee to perfect and report a bill defining the number, 
duties, and compensation of employees of the Senate and House.
  4415. On July 18, 1876,\6\ the Senate agreed to a concurrent 
resolution, which made the two committees to investigate Chinese 
immigration a joint committee. It does not appear that the House acted 
further than in the resolution already agreed to. Such a committee 
acted as a joint committee.
  4416. On December 6, 1876,\7\ the Senate passed, in connection with 
the appointment of its standing committees, resolutions empowering the 
committees on Enrolled Bills, Printing, and Library to act in 
conjunction with the similar committees of the House. It was stated at 
the time that this was the usual resolution. These resolutions were in 
the House referred to the Committee on Rules on January 4, 1877.\8\
  4417. Each House notifies the other by message of appointments of or 
changes in its membership on a joint committee.--When members of a 
joint committee authorized by concurrent resolution of the two Houses 
are appointed each House notifies the other of the appointment and the 
names of the appointees.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
  \1\ Debates, pp. 695, 696.
  \2\ John C. Calhoun, of South Carolina, Vice-President.
  \3\ Second session Thirty-eighth Congress, Journal, pp. 197, 203, 
378; Globe, pp. 619, 1257.
  \4\ First session Forty-fourth Congress, Journal, p. 1277; Record, p. 
4671.
  \5\ First session Forty-first Congress, Journal, p. 135; Globe, p. 
336.
  \6\ First session Forty-fourth Congress, Record, p. 4678.
  \7\ Second session Forty-fourth Congress, Record, p. 47; Journal, p. 
43.
  \8\ Second session Forty-fourth Congress, Journal, p. 155; Record, p. 
422.
                                                            Sec. 4418
An instance occurred on December 18, 1861,\1\ when the Senate notified 
the House of the appointment of the Senate members of the committee on 
the conduct of the war.
  4418. On January 5, 1810,\2\ a message was received from the Senate 
announcing that the Senate had ``ordered that Mr. Whiteside be of the 
Joint Committee on Enrolled Bills on their part in the place of Mr. 
Condit, who has been excused on account of indisposition.''
  4419. The statutes provide for the appointment of a joint committee 
of the two Houses to consider reports as to destruction of useless 
papers in the Executive Departments.--The statutes \3\ prescribe this 
method of disposing of useless papers in the Departments:

  Whenever there shall be in any one of the Executive Departments of 
the Government, or in the various public buildings under the control of 
the several Executive Departments,\4\ an accumulation of files of 
papers which are not needed or useful in the transaction of the current 
business of such Department and have no permanent value or historical 
interest, it shall be the duty of the head of such Department to submit 
to Congress a report of that fact, accompanied by a concise statement 
of the condition and character of such papers. And upon the submission 
of such report it shall be the duty of the presiding officer of the 
Senate to appoint two Senators and of the Speaker of the House of 
Representatives to appoint two Representatives, and the Senators and 
Representatives so appointed shall constitute a joint committee, to 
which shall be referred such report, with the accompanying statement of 
the condition and character of such papers, and such joint committee 
shall meet and examine such report and statement and the papers therein 
described, and submit to the Senate and House, respectively, a report 
of such examination and their recommendation. And if they report that 
such files of papers, or any part thereof, are not needed or useful in 
the transaction of the current business of such Department and have no 
permanent value or historical interest, then it shall be the duty of 
such head of the Department to sell as waste paper, or otherwise 
dispose of such files of papers, upon the best obtainable terms, after 
due publication of notice inviting proposals therefor, and receive and 
pay the proceeds thereof into the Treasury of the United States and 
make report thereof to Congress.\5\

  4420. A joint select committee expires with the session.--On December 
4, 1866,\6\ Mr. Thaddeus Stevens, of Pennsylvania, offered the 
following:

  Resolved (the Senate concurring), That the joint committee of fifteen 
on reconstruction, appointed during the last session of Congress, shall 
be reappointed under the same rules and regulations as then existed and 
that all the documents and resolutions which were referred then be now 
considered a referred to them anew.

  Mr. John A. Bingham, of Ohio, asked whether the committee, under the 
rules of the House, did not continue until the close of the Congress.
  The Speaker \7\ said:

  It does not; a joint select committee expires with the session.

  4421. A joint committee may be instructed by the two Houses acting 
concurrently or by either House acting independently.--On December
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
  \1\ Second session Thirty-seventh Congress, Journal, p. 88.
  \2\ Second session Eleventh Congress, Journal, p. 163 (Gales & Seaton 
ed.)
  \3\ 25 Stat. L., p. 672.
  \4\ 28 Stat. L., p. 933.
  \5\ The joint committees on the Library and Printing are also to a 
certain extent creatures of statute. See sections 4337 and 4347 of this 
volume.
  \6\ Second session Thirty-ninth Congress, Journal, p. 30; Globe, p. 
11.
  \7\ Schuyler Colfax, of Indiana, Speaker.
Sec. 4422
17, 1862,\1\ the House agreed to a concurrent resolution, which had 
been received from the Senate, directing the joint committee on the 
conduct of the war, appointed at the last session, to make a report to 
the Senate and House of Representatives with all convenient speed.
  4422. In 1862,\2\ the joint committee on the conduct of the war were 
instructed by either House independently, and reported to either House, 
according to the source of the instructions. Thus the Senate directed 
an investigation into the treatment of dead soldiers at Manassas, and 
the report was made to the Senate.
  The House frequently instructed the committee.\3\
  4423. On February 29, 1864 \4\ the House, by a simple resolution, 
instructed the Joint Committee on the Conduct of the War.\4\
  4424. The constitution of a joint committee, its quorum, chairman, 
etc.--The joint committee (of 1864) on the conduct of the war consisted 
of three Members of the Senate and four Members of the House. Mr. 
Benjamin F. Wade, of Ohio, first named of the Senate Members, acted as 
the chairman.
  The clerk of the committee was appointed and duly sworn on the first 
session, January 25, 1864.\5\
  On January 25, 1864,\6\ it was ordered that less than a quorum should 
be sufficient for taking testimony.
  On February 5 and 6, 1864,, the committee not only heard witnesses 
but passed votes, with two of the three Senate Members present and only 
two of the four House Members present by record. It is evident, 
therefore, that a quorum was assumed to be four of the whole seven 
rather than a majority of each branch of the committee.\7\ This does 
not seem to be wholly conclusive, however, as on March 4 \8\ an order 
passed relating to the summoning by a witness, when only three members 
were present, and these two Senators and one Member.\8\
  4425. A joint committee vote per capita and not as representatives of 
the two Houses.--On May 19, 1871,\9\ the joint committee on affairs in 
the late Insurrectionary States took a vote by yeas and nays, the 
committee consisting of seven Senators and fourteen Representatives. 
This vote was taken per capita, no distinction as to Houses being made.
  Thereafter on many other occasions votes were taken by yeas and nays 
and always per capita.
  4426. Although a joint committee votes per capita, the membership 
from the House is usually larger than from the Senate.--In 1874,\10\ 
the House agreed to a concurrent resolution providing for the 
appointment of a joint committee to investigate the affairs of the 
District of Columbia. The resolution as it passed
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
  \1\ Third session Thirty-seventh Congress, Journal, p. 85; Globe, p. 
111.
  \2\ See Journal, p. 636, second session Thirty-seventh Congress.
  \3\ See Journal, pp. 122, 255, 864.
  \4\ First session Thirty-eighth Congress, Journal, p. 320.
  \5\ Second session Thirty-eighth Congress, Senate Report No. 142, 
Journal of the Committee, P.VIII.
  \6\ P. VIII.
  \7\ Page XI.
  \8\ Page XIX.
  \9\ Second session Forty-second Congress, House Report No. 22, pt. 1, 
pp. 590, 593, 621, 622.
  \10\ First session Forty-third Congress, Journal, p. 421; Record, p. 
1212.
                                                            Sec. 4427
the House provided for five Representatives on the committee, and left 
the number of Senators in blank. The Senate, on February 5, filled the 
blank with five. This amendment was concurred in by the House.\1\ The 
Speaker \1\ appointed the committee as soon as the House had acted, not 
waiting for the Senate's concurrence.\2\
  4427. On December 12 and 13, 1865,\3\ the House and Senate authorized 
the joint committee on reconstruction, to consist of six Senators and 
nine Representatives. Objection was made to this committee, notably by 
Mr. James Doolittle, of Wisconsin, because the House Members would so 
outnumber the Senate Members on the committee. Mr. Doolittle said it 
was well understood that joint committees voted per capita, and not as 
representatives of the two Houses. Mr. Edgar Cowan, of Pennsylvania, 
for this reason, moved to reduce the number of House members to six. 
Thereupon Mr. Lyman Trumbull, of Illinois, inquired whether or not 
joint committees did not vote like conference committees, by Houses and 
not per capita. Mr. Cowan said he understood that this committee would 
not vote like a conference committee, but would be a joint committee 
voting per capita. Against Mr. Cowan's motion it was urged that the 
precedents all favored more Representatives than Senators on joint 
committees. The committee on the conduct of the war had been four to 
three. Mr. Cowan's amendment was disagreed to, yeas 14, nays 29.
  4428. On March 9, 1869,\4\ the House agreed to a concurrent 
resolution for the appointment of a joint select committee on 
retrenchment, to consist of four Members of the Senate and seven 
Members of the House.
  On March 10, in the Senate, the resolution was considered, and the 
point was made by Mr. George F. Edmunds, of Vermont, that as this 
committee would have the duty of recommending legislation it would be 
better to make the number four from each House. Mr. Lyman Trumbull, of 
Illinois, urged this amendment, because, as the committee would vote 
per capita, the House would control the committee unless the amendment 
should be adopted. The amendment was agreed to.
  On March 15 the House disagreed to the amendments of the Senate, and 
the Senate, having insisted, asked a conference, which was agreed to by 
the House.
  The conferees brought in an amendment making the membership four from 
the Senate and five from the House. This report was agreed to by both 
Houses.
  4429. On March 10, 1869,\5\ we find a discussion in the Senate over 
the propriety of there being a larger number of Representatives than 
Senators on a joint committee, and it was stated, although the opinion 
was not unanimous, that the custom had been generally to have a larger 
number of Representatives, as the House was the most numerous body, and 
that the question of numbers was not material, as the function of a 
committee was recommendatory and not final.
  4430. On June 25, 1879,\6\ the Senate considered briefly the question 
of the numbers of Senators and Representatives, respectively, on a 
joint committee, and
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
  \1\ James G. Blaine, of Maine, Speaker.
  \2\ Journal, pp. 360, 362; Record, pp. 1125, 1130.
  \3\ First session Thirty-ninth Congress, Globe, pp. 25-28.
  \4\ First session Forty-first Congress, Journal, pp. 22, 52, 58, 64, 
80, 94; Globe, pp. 37, 42, 43, 79, 86, 125, 153, 198.
  \5\ First session Forty-first Congress, Globe, pp. 45, 46.
  \6\ First session Forty-sixth Congress, Record, p. 2312.
Sec. 4431
amended a proposition for a joint committee so as to make the number 
the same from each House. The reason was that the other arrangement 
would enable the House to outvote the Senate.\1\
  This resolution was to raise a joint committee on the public service, 
to consist of three Senators and three Representatives. On June 26 \2\ 
the House passed it without amendment, according to the Record, but the 
Journal indicated that it did not pass, but was on June 30 referred to 
the Committee of the Whole.\3\ It was in the form of a joint 
resolution.
  4431. In the early days the House insisted on the larger portion of 
the membership of a joint committee and that the quorum and votes 
should be on a per capita basis.--On May 2, 1832 \4\ a message from the 
Senate asked the concurrence of the House in the following resolution 
of the Senate:

  Resolved, That a committee to consist of three members, two from the 
Senate to be named by the President of the Senate, and one from the 
House of Representatives to be named by the Speaker, be appointed to 
prepare and report at the next session of Congress a system of civil 
and criminal law for the District of Columbia, and for the organization 
of the courts therein, and that the committee cause the said system to 
be printed in the recess.

  On May 21 the House agreed to this resolution with an amendment 
increasing the number of the House Members of the Committee from one to 
three, and inserting the clause ``a majority of whom may act,'' so that 
the resolution in this respect would read:

  A committee to consist of five members, two from the Senate to be 
named by the President of the Senate, and three from the House of 
Representatives to be named by the Speaker, a majority of whom may act, 
be appointed to prepare, etc.

  On May 22 the Senate announced their concurrence in this amendment:

  4432. A joint committee may report in either House.--On January 7, 
1907,\5\ the House was considering this order:

  Ordered, That the bill (H. R. 17984) to provide a code of penal laws 
for the United States is hereby committed to the Joint Committee on 
Revision of the Laws, and that the said joint committee have leave to 
report the said bill at any time, and that the bill shall have the 
privileges pertaining to bills so reported.

  Mr. James R. Mann, of Illinois, rising to a parliamentary inquiry, 
asked:

  Is it possible for a joint committee to make a report of a bill to 
the House, or would that be made by the House members of the committee?

  The Speaker \6\ said:

  A joint committee, as the Chair understands it, can report to either 
House; that is, the section of the committee composed of Members of the 
House may report to this House, and the section of the committee on the 
part of the Senate may report to the Senate.

  4433. It was held in order to refer a matter to a joint committee, 
although a law directed that such matters be referred to the House Mem-
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
  \1\ See also section 4410 of this chapter.
  \2\ Record, p. 2343.
  \3\ Journal, p. 598.
  \4\ First session Twenty-second Congress, Journal, pp. 696, 771, 778; 
Debates, p. 3077.
  \5\ Second session Fifty-ninth Congress, Record, pp. 698, 700.
  \6\ Joseph G. Cannon, of Illinois, Speaker.
                                                            Sec. 4434
bers of the said joint committee.--On May 5, 1852,\1\ the House was 
considering the following resolution:

  Resolved, That there be printed for the use of the House of 
Representatives fifty thousand copies of the mechanical part of the 
Patent Office report, and three thousand additional copies for the use 
of the Commissioner of Patents.

  Mr. Thomas L. Clingman, of North Carolina, moved to commit the 
resolution to the Committee on Printing (which was a joint committee) 
with instructions to report as to what arrangements and contracts had 
been made for the public printing.
  Mr. Frederick P. Stanton, of Tennessee, made the point of order that 
the motion submitted by Mr. Clingman was out of order, on the ground 
that, under the law on the subject of printing,\2\ it was directed that 
all propositions to print an extra number of any document should be 
referred to the members of the Committee on Printing chosen by the 
House, and could not be referred to the joint committee.
  The Speaker \3\ said:

  In regard to the point of order which has been raised, the Chair 
knows of no rule by which the House of Representatives could 
distinguish very clearly between the duties assigned to the Joint 
Committee on the Public Printing, and those assigned to any portion of 
the members of that committee. It Is rather an embarrassing question. 
By the joint resolution of the two Houses a joint committee on the 
public printing has been created. There is a clause in that resolution 
which the Chair begs leave to repeat. It is, that all motions to print 
extra numbers of any bill, paper, or document, in either House, shall 
be referred to the members of the committee of that House, who shall 
report upon the propriety of printing, and the probable expense 
therefor. The Chair has not had time to look to the whole law on the 
subject, and is therefore to some extent groping in the dark. The 
Chair, however, is not disposed to make that distinction between the 
committee and the members of the committee. * * * It makes no 
difference to the House whether this report came from the whole of the 
joint committee, or whether it emanated from the members of the 
committee on the part of the House. It is regularly here, and may be 
committed to the Committee on the Judiciary or any other committee.

  Mr. Stanton having appealed, the appeal was laid on the table.
  4434. Joint committees are authorized to sit during recess of 
Congress by concurrent resolution.--On June 23, 1874 \4\ by concurrent 
resolution, the Joint Committee on Printing of the two Houses was 
authorized to sit during the coming recess of Congress.
  On the same day a concurrent resolution was agreed to authorizing the 
committees on appropriations of the two Houses to meet at the Capitol 
during the recess to make inquiry and report a method of reforms in the 
expenditures.
  4435. On December 7, 1880,\5\ the House agreed to a concurrent 
resolution from the Senate authorizing the Joint Committee on the 
Yorktown Centennial Celebration to sit during the recess of Congress. 
It was stated in debate that the coming holiday recess would be the 
only remaining recess of the existing Congress.
  4436. For performing duties after the expiration of the term of a 
Congress commissions are created by law.--On February 16, 1905,\6\ in 
the Sen-
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
  \1\ First session Thirty-second Congress, Journal, p. 675; Globe, p. 
1252.
  \2\ The law on this subject has been changed since this time.
  \3\ Linn Boyd, of Kentucky, Speaker.
  \4\ First session Forty-third Congress, Journal, pp. 1309-1316; 
Record, pp. 5440, 5441.
  \5\ Third session Forty-sixth Congress, Record, p. 18.
  \6\ Third session Fifty-eighth Congress, Record, p. 2709.
Sec. 4436
ate, Mr. John Kean, of New Jersey, from the Committee to Audit and 
Control the Contingent Expenses of the Senate, reported a resolution, 
which was agreed to by the Senate, as follows:

  Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), 
That the Committee on Printing of the Senate, with two Members of the 
present House of Representatives who are reelected to the next 
Congress, to be appointed by the Speaker of the House of 
Representatives, or any subcommittee of said special joint committee, 
are hereby authorized to examine into the numbers printed of the 
various documents, reports, bills, and other papers published by order 
of Congress, or of either House thereof, and of the Congressional 
Record, and if, in their judgment, the conditions as they find them 
warrant remedial legislation to report a bill at the next session of 
Congress making such reductions in the numbers and cost of printing and 
such changes and reduction in the distribution of said publications as 
they may deem expedient, with a report giving their reasons therefor; 
and that the said committee is also authorized to investigate the 
printing and binding for the Executive Departments executed at the 
Government Printing Office and at the branch printing offices and 
binderies in the various Departments, and if, in their judgment, the 
conditions as they find them warrant remedial legislation, to report a 
bill at the next session of Congress, making such reductions in 
expenses and imposing such checks as they may deem expedient, with a 
report giving their reasons therefor; and said committee is further 
authorized to make any other investigation calculated, in their 
opinion, to reduce the cost of the public printing, and report the 
result thereof; and in making the inquiries required by this resolution 
said committee shall have power to send for persons and papers, to 
administer oaths, to employ a stenographer to report its hearings, to 
call on the heads of Executive Departments and the Public Printer for 
such information in regard to the preceding matters as they may desire, 
to do whatever is necessary for a thorough investigation of the 
subject, and to sit during the recess of Congress. Any subcommittee may 
exercise the powers hereby granted to said committee, and the expenses 
of said investigation shall be paid one-half from the contingent fund 
of the Senate upon vouchers duly approved by the chairman of the 
Committee on Printing and one-half from the contingent fund of the 
House of Representatives.

  On March 1,\1\ while the general deficiency appropriation bill was 
under consideration in the House, Mr. John Dalzell, of Pennsylvania, 
offered an amendment embodying the substance of the above resolution, 
which had been referred to the Committee on Rules in the House. The 
amendment proposed by Mr. Dalzell was agreed to, and became law, as 
follows:

  That the Committee on Printing of the Senate, with three Members of 
the present House of Representatives who are reelected to the next 
Congress, to be appointed by the Speaker of the present House of 
Representatives, shall constitute a commission, and they, or any 
subcommittee of said special joint commission, are hereby authorized to 
examine into the numbers printed of the various documents, reports, 
bills, and other papers published by order of Congress, or of either 
House thereof, and of the Congressional Record, and if, in their 
judgment, the conditions, as they find them, warrant remedial 
legislation to report a bill at the next session of Congress making 
such reductions in the numbers and cost of printing and such changes 
and reduction in the distribution of said publications as they may deem 
expedient, with a report giving their reasons therefor; and that the 
said commission is also authorized to investigate the printing and 
binding for the Executive Departments executed at the Government 
Printing Office and at the branch printing offices and binderies in the 
various Departments, and if, in their judgment, the conditions as they 
find them warrant remedial legislation to report a bill at the next 
session of Congress, making such reductions in expenses and imposing 
such checks as they may deem expedient, with a report giving their 
reasons therefor; and said commission is further authorized to make any 
other investigation calculated, in their opinion, to reduce the cost of 
the public printing and report the result thereof, and in making the 
inquiries required by this resolution said commission shall have power 
to send for persons and papers, to administer oaths, to employ a 
stenographer to report its hearings, to call on the heads of Executive 
Departments and the Public Printer for such information in regard to 
the
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
  \1\ Record, p. 3814; 33 Stat. L., p. 1249.
                                                            Sec. 4437
preceding matters as they may desire, to do whatever is necessary for a 
thorough investigation of the subject, and to sit during the recess of 
Congress. Any subcommittee may exercise the powers hereby granted to 
said commission, and the expenses of said investigation shall be paid 
one-half from the contingent fund of the Senate, upon vouchers duly 
approved by the chairman of the Committee on Printing, and one-half 
from the contingent fund of the House of Representatives.\1\

  4437. The two Houses, by concurrent resolution, have assumed to 
extend the powers of a joint committee beyond the adjournment of 
Congress, but later action seems to recognize a law as the proper 
instrumentality for such purpose. On March 2, 1863,\2\ the Senate 
agreed to the following:

  Resolved by the Senate of the United States (the House of 
Representatives concurring), That in order to enable the joint 
committee on the conduct of the war to complete their investigations of 
certain important matters now before them, and which they have not been 
able to complete by reason of inability to obtain important witnesses, 
they be authorized to continue their sessions for thirty days after the 
close of the present Congress, and to place their testimony and reports 
in the hands of the Secretary of the Senate.

  On the same day the House agreed to the resolution.
  4438. In 1865 \3\ the joint committee on the conduct of the war was 
continued beyond the session and the Congress by a concurrent 
resolution extending their powers ``for thirty days after the close of 
the present Congress.'' The committee went right on under this 
authority examining witnesses, etc. On March 13, 1865, the joint 
committee passed an order authorizing a less number than a quorum to 
act as well as examine witnesses, and on March 15, three members 
ordered the Secretary of War to furnish the committee with copies of 
certain papers.\4\
  4439. On March 1, 1865,\5\ a proposition to continue the power of the 
Joint Committee on Commerce after the end of the Congress was put in 
the form of a joint resolution, which passed the House but apparently 
failed in the Senate to be acted on.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
  \1\ The reason for this action was a doubt of the power of the two 
Houses, by concurrent resolution, to endow a committee with power for a 
period beyond the life of the Congress.
  \2\ Third session Thirty-seventh Congress, Journal, p. 563; Globe, 
pp. 1454, 1489.
  \3\ Second session Thirty-eighth Congress, Report No. 142; Journal of 
the Committee, pp. 33, 35.
  \4\ The monetary commission of 1877, consisting of Members of the two 
Houses and other persons, was created by a concurrent resolution of the 
two Houses, and so was on the same basis as to authority as a joint 
committee. But the monetary commission did not sit beyond the life of 
the Congress which created it. (First session Forty-fourth Congress, 
House Journal, pp. 1393, 1509; Record, p. 5218; Second session Forty-
fourth Congress, House Journal, p. 627; Record, p. 2125; House Report 
No. 185.)
  In 1880 a joint committee of the two Houses was in existence for 
arranging the Yorktown centennial; but as that Congress expired the 
joint committee was by law made a joint commission. (Third session 
Forty-sixth Congress, Record, p. 18; 21 Stat. L., pp. 163, 522.)
  In 1893 the Congress desired to have the Executive Departments 
investigated by a joint committee of three Members of each House, to be 
appointed by the presiding officers thereof. But as it was desirable 
that the joint committee should sit after the expiration of the Fifty-
second Congress, a law was passed creating a commission. (27 Stat. L., 
p. 682.)
  Other commissions of recent creation, although of not precisely the 
same function, are:
  The Industrial Commission (30 Stat. L., p. 476). This consisted of 
five Senators and five Representatives and nine other persons.
  The American Merchant Marine Commission (33 Stat. L., p. 561). This 
consisted of five Senators and five Representatives; but it reported 
before the expiration of the Congress creating it, and perhaps a joint 
committee would have done as well.
  \5\ Second session Thirty-eighth Congress, Journal, p. 378; Globe, p. 
1258.
Sec. 4440
  4440. In 1893 \1\ the legislative appropriation bill conferred on the 
Speaker and President of the Senate the appointment of a joint 
commission to investigate the Executive Departments of the Government. 
This commission consisted of three from each House.
  4441. On July 8, 1882, \2\ the Speaker announced the committee 
provided for in the joint resolution of July 1, 1882, providing for 
erection of the memorial column at Washington's headquarters, at 
Newburg, N. Y.
  4442. The act of March 10, 1882,\3\ authorized the appointment of a 
joint committee to authorize the erection of a statue of Chief Justice 
Marshall. This committee consisted of three Members from each House, to 
be appointed by the President of the Senate and Speaker of the House.
  In this case the House appointing to the committee notified the other 
House of its action.\4\
  4443. In 1882 \5\ the joint select committee to inquire into the 
subject of the American merchant marine was authorized, to consist of 
three Senators and six Representatives. This was provided for by a 
resolution specifying nothing which could not be provided for by the 
ordinary concurrent resolution, yet it was put in joint resolution 
form, and was approved by the President of the United States.
  4444. The act of June 8, 1880,\6\ ``to provide additional 
accommodations for the Library of Congress,'' provided for a joint 
select committee to consist of three Senators and three 
Representatives.
  4445. Instance wherein a joint rule provided a joint committee for 
the next Congress.--On March 2, 1869,\7\ a concurrent resolution was 
agreed to providing that at the beginning of the next session, which 
would be the first session of the next Congress, a joint committee on 
the civil service should be appointed. At the beginning of the next 
Congress this concurrent resolution was assumed to have the force of a 
joint rule; and other conditions having arisen which seemed to make the 
committee unnecessary, the Senate originated and sent to the House a 
resolution rescinding the joint rule or provision. The House at first 
refused to agree to this resolution to rescind, and nonconcurred and 
asked a conference. Later the House decided to have a committee of its 
own on the subject, and a motion to reconsider the action of the House 
on the Senate resolution to rescind was entered. This seems to have 
ended the matter, for the Committee on Civil Service does not appear as 
a joint committee.\8\
  4446. A Senator, member of a joint commission created by law and 
appointed by the presiding officers of the two Houses, respectively, 
ten-
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
  \1\ Second session Fifty-second Congress, Record, pp. 2549, 2617; 27 
Stat. L., p. 682.
  \2\ First session Forty-seventh Congress, Journal, pp. 1611, 1612.
  \3\ 22 Stat. L., p. 28.
  \4\ First session Forty-seventh Congress, Journal, p. 844.
  \5\ First session Forty-seventh Congress, Record, pp. 6959, 6991, 
7019.
  \6\ 21 Stat. L., p. 165.
  \7\ First session Forty-first Congress, Journal, p. 104; Globe, pp. 
45, 63, 228, 248.
  \8\ The question of the continued existence of the Senate as an 
organized body and the temporary existence of each House was discussed 
at length when the joint rules were under consideration on January 17, 
1876. (First session Forty-fourth Congress, Record, pp. 434-438.)
                                                            Sec. 4447
dered his resignation in the Senate.--On March 3, 1905,\1\ in the 
Senate, Mr. Francis M. Cockrell, of Missouri, said:

  I tender my resignation as a member of the Senate building commission 
authorized by the sundry civil act of April 24, 1904, to secure a site 
and superintend the construction of a fireproof building for the use of 
the Senate.

  The President pro tempore said:

  The Senator from Missouri resigns as one of the commission to procure 
a site and erect a building for the use of the Senate. The Chair hears 
no objection by the Senate. The Chair appoints in the place made vacant 
by the resignation of the Senator from Missouri the Senator from 
Colorado [Mr. Teller].

  4447. An instance in which a joint select committee elected its 
chairman.--On April 20,1871,\2\ the joint select committee on affairs 
in the late insurrectionary States, organized. This committee was 
composed of seven Senators and fourteen Representatives. It was

  Ordered, That Mr. Scott, chairman of the committee on the part of the 
Senate, be chairman of the joint committee.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
  \1\ Third session Fifty-eighth Congress, Record, p. 3952.
  \2\ Second session Forty-second Congress, House Report No. 22, pt. 1, 
p. 590.