1108 CONGRESSIONAL PROCEEDINGS. 
Mr. Exr Sautsspury. I should like to ask the Senator from Ver- 
mont if there is any provision made for an appeal in case of condem- 
nation ? 
Mr. Epmunps. The amendment provides that if this commission of 
three heads of Departments can not agree upon the value of the land, 
they shall apply to the supreme court of the District, which proceeds 
judicially, and then, as in such cases, no appeal is provided for unless 
a question of law arises, and in that case an appeal is vested by gen- 
eral law. 
Mr. Hoar. I desire to raise the question that the amendment is not 
competent under Rule XVI. 
Mr. Epmunps. It is, I think. 
The PrestmbDENT pro tempore. Will the Senator indicate the clause 
of the rule? 
Mr. Epmunps. The amendment has been referred to the Committee 
on Appropriations, I think. 
Mr. Hoar. I raise the question that the amendment is irrelevant to 
the matter of the bill, and also the question that it proposes general 
legislation. 
I should like to inquire whether it has been reported by a standing 
committee and referred to the Committee on Appropriations more 
than twenty-four hours before being offered here / 
Mr. Morritz. I have reported from the Committee on Public 
Buildings and Grounds an amendment for a zoological park, not the 
amendment for a general park. 
Mr. Hoar. This is a separate amendment, and has not been referred 
to the Committee on Appropriations, I understand, twenty-four hours 
before being offered in the Senate. 
Mr. Epmunps. Mr. President 
The PresIpENT pro tempore. While the question of order is not 
strictly debatable, as an appeal would lie, the Chair will hear the Sen- 
ator from Vermont on the subject. 
Mr. Epmunps. I was under the impression that my colleague had 
reported from the Committee on Public Buildings and Grounds the 
amendment for a general park, but he says he only reported the one 
for a zoological park at $200,000. Therefore I think myself that the 
amendment would be subject to the point of order that it proposes a 
new item of appropriation which had not been referred to the Com- 
mittee on Appropriations. The other parts of the point of order I do 
not think are well founded. 
Mr. Hoar. If it would be out of order for any purpose, I suppose 
it is not necessary to pass on the other points at present. 
Mr. Epmunps. But the Chair may differ with my friend. 
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Chair would be compelled to hold 
that under the second paragraph of Rule XVI, technically the amend- 
