[Deschler-Brown Precedents, Volume 12, Chapter 29 (Sections 1-34), Volume 13, Chapter 29 (Sections 35-end, plus index)]
[Chapter 29. Consideration and Debate]
[G. References to House, Committees, or Members]
[Â§ 63. Falsehood]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]


[Page 10886-10889]
 
                               CHAPTER 29
 
                        Consideration and Debate
 
             G. REFERENCES TO HOUSE, COMMITTEES, OR MEMBERS
 
Sec. 63.--Falsehood

    A Member may assert in debate that the statement of another Member 
is untrue,(11) provided that no accusation of intentional 
misrepresentation is made.(12) Any term or language implying 
a 
deliberate misstatement of the truth, for whatever motive, is 
unparliamentary,(13) including allegations of 
insincerity,(14) and hypocrisy.(15)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
11. See Sec. 63.3, infra. See also 5 Hinds' Precedents Sec. 5159.
12. See the statement of Speaker Joseph W. Byrns (Tenn.) at Sec. 63.3, 
        infra. For past rulings, see 5 Hinds' Precedents Sec. Sec. 5158 
        (``That is not true, and he knows it'' held in order), 5160 
        (``Bold and direct attack upon truth'' held out of order by 
        vote of Senate); 8 Cannon's Precedents Sec. 2545 (``The 
        devotion of the gentleman . . . to the truth is so notorious 
        that I shall not reply'' held out of order).
            Charges of deliberate falsehood against persons who are not 
        Members are in order; see 8 Cannon's Precedents Sec. 2532.
13. See Sec. Sec. 63.4 (``false and slanderous''), 63.5 (``lies and 
        half-truths''), infra; Sec. 61.2, supra (``cover up 
        wrongdoing''). See also 8 Cannon's Precedents Sec. 2530 
        (``liar'').
14. See Sec. 63.7, infra; 5 Hinds' Precedents Sec. 5148.
15. See Sec. 63.6, infra (``hypocrisy'' linked to ``falsehood''); 
        compare 8 Cannon's Precedents 
        Sec. 2542.                          -------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Allegations of Express or Implied Falsehood

Sec. 63.1 The Speaker ruled that the word ``canard'' meant falsehood 
    and was out of order in debate when referring to another Member.

    On May 11, 1949,(16) Mr. Emanuel Celler, of New York, 
stated in debate in reference to Mr. John 
E. Rankin, of Mississippi, ``Mr. Speaker, I cannot let the occasion go 
by without commenting on the canard that the gentleman from Mississippi 
was guilty of when he

[[Page 10887]]

called the Antidefamation League subversive.'' Mr. Rankin demanded that 
the words be taken down and Speaker Sam Rayburn, of Texas, ruled as 
follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. 95 Cong. Rec. 6042, 6043, 81st Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Chair desires to make a statement. There are too many 
    ``left-handed'' compliments being passed around this House all the 
    time on both sides.
        The word ``canard'' to me conveys the idea that a man has told 
    a falsehood. Therefore, if anybody desires to move to strike it 
    from the Record--without objection, the word ``canard'' will be 
    stricken from the Record.
        There was no objection.

Sec. 63.2 A statement in debate referring to another Member ``when he 
    comes here to defend some slime-monger who goes on the radio and 
    lies about me, then I am ready to meet him anywhere'' was held in 
    order.

    On Feb. 12, 1946,(17) Mr. John E. Rankin, of 
Mississippi, stated in debate in reference to Mr. Adolph J. Sabath, of 
Illinois, ``when he comes here to defend some slime-monger who goes on 
the radio and lies about me, then I am ready to meet him anywhere.'' 
Mr. Sabath demanded that the words be taken down. However, Speaker Sam 
Rayburn, of Texas, ruled that the language objected to was not a breach 
of order since it was directed not towards Mr. Sabath but towards a 
news commentator.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
17. 92 Cong. Rec. 1240, 1241, 79th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 63.3 Where a Member stated in debate he did ``not believe a word 
    that another Member has said,'' the language was held in order as 
    no intentional misrepresentation was implied.

    On July 2, 1935,(18) Mr. Maury Maverick, of Texas, 
stated in debate ``I do not believe a word 
the gentleman from Maine [Mr. 
Ralph O. Brewster] said'' while 
the House was considering House Resolution 285, to appoint a committee 
to investigate charges of intimidation of Mr. Brewster by an official 
of the executive branch.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
18. 79 Cong. Rec. 10670, 10671, 74th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Mr. Brewster demanded that the words be taken down as a challenge 
to his words on the floor of the House. Speaker Joseph W. Byrns, of 
Tennessee, ruled as follows:

        The gentleman from Texas made the statement, but that does not 
    necessarily imply that the gentleman from Maine intentionally made 
    a misstatement on his own part. He simply said he did not believe 
    it, but this did not necessarily imply that the gentleman from 
    Maine intentionally made a misstatement. What the gentleman from

[[Page 10888]]

    Texas said may be construed as meaning that the gentleman from 
    Maine was merely mistaken in his conclusions, and that the 
    gentleman did not deliberately make a false statement.

Sec. 63.4 A statement in debate that the remarks of a Member were 
    ``false and slanderous'' was held out of order.

    On Dec. 20, 1943,(19) Mr. Adolph J. Sabath, of Illinois, 
had the floor and was speaking of a bill related to the right of 
servicemen to vote. During the course of his remarks, he referred to a 
certain bill as depriving them of the vote. Mr. John E. Rankin, of 
Mississippi, rose to demand that that language be taken down; he stated 
``I make the point of order that his statement is false and 
slanderous.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
19. 89 Cong. Rec. 10922, 78th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Mr. Sabath demanded that Mr. Rankin's accusation be taken down and 
Speaker Pro Tempore John W. McCormack, of Massachusetts, ruled on both 
points of order. He ruled that Mr. Rankin's statement clearly 
transgressed the rules of the House and declined to sustain Mr. 
Rankin's argument that ``When any Member rises on the floor and makes a 
false statement, any other Member has the right to say that that 
statement 
is false; and when that statement 
is slanderous, any gentleman is within the rules of the House when he 
says so.''

Sec. 63.5 Language in a telegram read in debate in the House which 
    repudiated ``lies and half-truths'' of a House committee report was 
    held out of order as reflecting on the integrity of committee 
    members.

    On June 16, 1947,(20) Mr. Chet Holifield, of California, 
read in the House a telegram from the Southern Conference for Human 
Welfare. Mr. John E. Rankin, of Mississippi, made a point of order 
against certain words in the telegram and demanded that they be taken 
down: ``We completely repudiate the lies and half-truths of the report 
that was issued and consider it un-American.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
20. 93 Cong. Rec. 7065, 80th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Speaker Joseph W. Martin, Jr., of Massachusetts, ruled that the 
words objected to, referring to 
the Committee on Un-American 
Activities, were unparliamentary, since they ``reflect upon the 
character and integrity of the membership of a committee. . . .'' The 
words were stricken on motion from the Congressional Record.

Hypocrisy

Sec. 63.6 A statement in referring to another Member that ``I

[[Page 10889]]

    was reminded that pretexts are never wanting when hypocrisy wishes 
    to add malice to falsehood or cowardice to stab a foe who cannot 
    defend himself'' was held unparliamentary.

    On Oct. 25, 1945,(1) Mr. Edward E. Cox, of Georgia, 
stated in debate in reference to Mr. Emanuel Celler, of New York: ``I 
was reminded that pretexts are never wanting when hypocrisy wishes to 
add malice to falsehood or cowardice to stab a foe who cannot 
defend himself.'' Mr. Celler demanded that the words be taken down, and 
Speaker Sam Rayburn, of Texas, ruled the language unparliamentary as 
specifically directed to Mr. Celler.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 91 Cong. Rec. 10044, 79th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Allegations of Insincerity

Sec. 63.7 A statement by a Member ``I cannot believe that the gentleman 
    from Mississippi is sincere in what he has just said'' was held out 
    of order as a personal attack on a Member's sincerity.

    On Nov. 2, 1942,(2) Mr. Harold Knutson, of Minnesota, 
stated in debate: ``Mr. Speaker, I cannot 
believe that the gentleman from Mississippi [Mr. John E. Rankin] is 
sincere in what he has just said.'' Mr. Rankin demanded that the words 
be taken down and Speaker Pro Tempore Jere Cooper, of Tennessee, ruled 
as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. 88 Cong. Rec. 8702, 77th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Chair is of the opinion that the words complained of, in 
    effect, accuse the gentleman from Mississippi of insincerity and 
    constitute a personal attack on the sincerity of the gentleman from 
    Mississippi and are in violation of the rules of the House.