seth tillman
Mon, 08 Feb 2010 12:48:21 -0800
My understanding is that circa 1787, the House of Commons and the House of Lords had different procedures in regard to tie votes. In the HL, following the common law, a tie vote is a defeated vote. But in the HC, a tie vote is inconclusive and the chair must vote to break the tie: i.e., all votes must be decided by majority rule. Greene and others have argued that colonial parliaments and assemblies followed British parliamentary procedures. Does anyone know if British New World colonial upper houses circa 1787 followed HLs practice? At this time were colonial lower houses following the HC practice? As far as I know, the modern American practice, across state legislatures and in Congress, is that a tie vote is a defeated vote. If HC practice once prevailed here, when and why did it change? Seth Seth Barrett Tillman Adjunct Professor Rutgers Law School (Newark) http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/cf_dev/AbsByAuth.cfm?per_id=345891 http://works.bepress.com/seth_barrett_tillman/ RECENT RESPONSES TO MY PUBLICATIONS: Jeremy D. Bailey, Response, The Traditional View of Hamilton's Federalist No. 77 and an Unexpected Challenge, 33 Harv. J.L. & Pub. Pol'y 169 (2010), http://tinyurl.com/yz8sldo , responding to http://tinyurl.com/yffqfzn Bruce G. Peabody, Response, Analogize This: Partial Constitutional Text, Religion, and Maintaining Our Political Order, 2010 Cardozo L. Rev. de novo 204, http://tinyurl.com/ydb22be , responding to http://tinyurl.com/ylkjaxa & http://tinyurl.com/ydplgef Steve Sheppard, Response, What Oaths Meant to the Framers' Generation: A Preliminary Sketch, 2009 Cardozo L. Rev. de novo 273, http://tinyurl.com/yk6974l , responding to http://tinyurl.com/ylkjaxa & http://tinyurl.com/ydplgef
_______________________________________________ To post, send message to Conlawprof@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/conlawprof Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.