[Deschler's Precedents, Volume 3, Chapters 10 - 14]
[Chapter 11. Questions of Privilege]
[C. Basis of Questions of Privilege of the House]
[Â§ 9. Charges Involving Members]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]


[Page 1604-1606]
 
                               CHAPTER 11
 
                         Questions of Privilege
 
            C. BASIS OF QUESTIONS OF PRIVILEGE OF THE HOUSE
 
Sec. 9. Charges Involving Members

Charges by a Member

Sec. 9.1 A resolution providing for an investigation of charges by a 
    Member that an executive officer improperly attempted to influence 
    the Member's vote presents a question involving the privilege of 
    the House.

    On July 2, 1935,(1) Mr. Hamilton Fish, Jr., of New York, 
presented as a question of the privilege of the House a resolution 
(2) declaring that Mr. Ralph Brewster, of Maine, had stated 
that he had been approached by a federal officer and told that if he 
(Brewster) did not vote against a provi

[[Page 1605]]

sion in the so-called ``Federal Power Act,'' certain funds allocated 
for public works in his home district would be withheld.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 79 Cong. Rec. 10669-71, 74th Cong. 1st Sess.
 2. H. Res. 285.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A point of order was made by Mr. Thomas L. Blanton, of Texas, that 
the resolution was not privileged. The Speaker (3) in his 
ruling on the point of order, stated:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. Joseph W. Byrns (Tenn.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        . . . The gentleman from Maine [Mr. Brewster] has made certain 
    serious charges. It is not necessary, of course, for the Chair to 
    pass on the charges. That is a matter for the House to determine. 
    But the Chair does feel that in view of the statements made by the 
    gentleman from Maine on his own responsibility as a Member of this 
    House, as well as those contained in the pending resolution, that 
    if such statements are found to be correct, then it seems to the 
    Chair that the integrity of the proceedings of this House have been 
    seriously interfered with. The Chair, therefore, thinks that the 
    resolution presents a question of the privilege of the House, and 
    overrules the point of order.

Charges Concerning Member Generally

Sec. 9.2 A resolution for the investigation of charges by a Member 
    concerning fellow Members, accusing them of giving away atomic 
    secrets, raises a question of the privilege of the House.

    On May 5, 1952,(4) Mr. Clare E. Hoffman, of Michigan, 
submitted, as a question involving the privilege of the House, a 
resolution (5) providing that Mr. Edwin Arthur Hall, of New 
York, be given an opportunity to appear before the bar of the House to 
explain or that a committee be appointed to investigate the 
authenticity of statements appearing in the press that Mr. Hall 
declared he ``resents Congressmen who get soused and who in all 
probability are giving away atomic secrets to the enemy while under the 
influence of liquor.'' Pursuant to a motion authorizing the Speaker to 
refer this resolution to ``a committee,'' the Speaker (6) 
ordered it referred to the Committee on Rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 4. 98 Cong. Rec. 4787-97, 82d Cong. 2d Sess.
 5. H. Res. 631.
 6. Sam Rayburn (Tex.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Charges Concerning a Fellow Member

Sec. 9.3 A resolution alleging that a Member without authority 
    addressed questionnaires to school teachers requesting their 
    opinion on communism does not present a question of the privilege 
    of the House.

    On June 18, 1936,(7) Mr. Kent E. Keller, of Illinois, 
offered as a

[[Page 1606]]

matter involving the privilege of the House a resolution concerning the 
alleged unauthorized action of Mr. Thomas L. Blanton, of Texas, whereby 
he addressed questionnaires to school teachers in the District of 
Columbia requesting their opinions on communism. A point of order was 
then made by Mr. Claude A. Fuller, of Arkansas, that the offered 
resolution did not involve a question of the privilege of the House. In 
his ruling sustaining the point of order, the Speaker (8) 
said:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 7. 80 Cong. Rec. 9947, 74th Cong. 2d Sess.
 8. William B. Bankhead (Ala.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        . . . The Chair is somewhat familiar with the precedents 
    involved in matters of this sort. The question of privilege under 
    rule IX under which this resolution is offered provides that 
    questions of privilege shall be----

            First, those affecting the rights of the House 
        collectively, its safety, dignity, and the integrity of its 
        proceedings.

        The matter set up in the resolution constitutes an allegation 
    of certain conduct on the part of an individual Member of the 
    House, who, it seems, wrote certain letters to school teachers or 
    other persons in the District of Columbia. Whether or not the 
    subject matter of the letter was proper or not, whether it was a 
    matter of propriety or not, whether it was a matter of good 
    judgment or not, is not one that involves under this rule the 
    question of the privileges of the House and its proceedings, in the 
    opinion of the Chair. The Chair, therefore, sustains the point of 
    order.