[Constitution, Jefferson's Manual, and the Rules of the House of Representatives, 105th Congress]
[105th Congress]
[House Document 104-272]
[Jeffersons Manual of ParliamentaryPractice]
[Pages 216-230]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]


 

                   sec. xxxiii.--privileged questions.



Sec. 437. Possession of a bill by the 
House.

  It is no  possession of a bill unless it be delivered to the Clerk to 
read, or the Speaker reads the title. Lex. Parl., 274; Elysynge Mem., 
85; Ord. House of Commons, 64.





Sec. 438. Theory as to privileged questions.

  It is a  general 
rule that the question first moved and seconded shall be first put. 
Scob., 28, 22; 2 Hats., 81. But this rule gives way to what may be 
called privileged questions; and the privileged questions are of 
different grades among themselves.



  In the House of Representatives, by rule and practice the system of 
privileged motions and privileged questions has been highly developed 
(rule IX, clause 4 of rule XI, clause 4 of rule XVI, and clause 1 of 
rule XXIV).


[[Page 217]]

will, and indefinitely. Yet this motion can 
not be received after another question is actually put and while the 
House is engaged in voting.



Sec. 439. Precedence of the motion to adjourn.

  A motion  to 
adjourn simply takes place of all others; for otherwise the House might 
be kept sitting against its 


  The rules and practice of the House of Representatives have prescribed 
comprehensively the privilege and status of the motion to adjourn 
(clause 4 of rule XVI). The motion intervenes between the putting of the 
question and the voting, and also between the different methods of 
voting, as between a vote by division and a vote by yeas and nays, as 
after the yeas and nays are ordered and before the roll call begins (V, 
5366). But after the roll call begins it may not be interrupted (V, 
6053). Clause 4 of rule XVI was amended in the 93d Congress to provide 
that a motion that when the House adjourns on that day it stand 
adjourned to meet at a day and time certain is of equal privilege with 
the motion to adjourn, if the Speaker in his discretion recognizes for 
that purpose (H. Res. 6, pp. 26-27). In the 102d Congress the motion to 
authorize the Speaker to declare a recess was given an equal privilege 
(H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 1991, p. 39).


[[Page 218]]



Sec. 440. Obsolete parliamentary law governing 
orders of the day.

  Orders of  the day take place of all other questions, except 
for adjournment--that is to say, the question which is the subject of an 
order is made a privileged one, pro hac vice. The order is a repeal of 
the general rule as to this special case. When any Member moves, 
therefore, for the order of the day to be read, no further debate is 
permitted on the question which was before the House; for if the debate 
might proceed it might continue through the day and defeat the order. 
This motion, to entitle it to precedence, must be for the orders 
generally, and not for any particular one; and if it be carried on the 
question, ``Whether the House will now proceed to the orders of the 
day?'' they must be read and proceeded on in the course in which they 
stand, 2 Hats., 83; for priority of order gives priority of right, which 
can not be taken away but by another special order.


  ``Orders of the day'' are part of the regular and daily order of 
business (IV, 3151). Although a mention of them has survived in clause 1 
of rule XXIV, ``orders of the day'' have disappeared from the practice 
of the House (IV, 3057) and should not be confused with ``special 
orders,'' which are resolutions reported from the Committee on Rules 
pursuant to clause 4 of rule XI to provide for consideration of matters 
not regularly in order. The term ``special orders'' is also used 
separately to describe permissions for Members to address the House at 
the conclusion of legislative business.



Sec. 441. Jefferson's discussion of certain privileged 
motions.

  After  these there are other privileged questions, which will 
require considerable explanation.



  It is proper that every parliamentary assembly should have certain 
forms of questions, so adapted as to enable them fitly to dispose of 
every proposition which can be made to them. Such are: 1. The previous 
question. 2. To postpone indefinitely. 3. To adjourn a question to a 
definite day. 4. To lie on the table. 5. To commit. 6. To amend. The 
proper occasion for each of these questions should be understood.


  The House of Representatives by clause 4 of rule XVI has established 
the priority and other conditions of motions of this kind.




Sec. 442. Obsolete use of the previous 
question.

  1. When a  proposition is moved which it is useless or inexpedient now 
to express or discuss, the previous question has been introduced for 
suppressing for that time the motion and its discussion. 3 Hats., 188, 
189.



  The previous question of the parliamentary law has been changed by the 
House of Representatives into an instrument of entirely different use 
(V, 5445; rule XVII).


[[Page 219]]

session, they postpone it indefinitely. 3 Hats., 183. This 
quashes the proposition for that session, as an indefinite adjournment 
is a dissolution, or the continuance of a suit sine die is a 
discontinuance of it.



Sec. 443. The motion to postpone indefinitely.

  2. But as  the 
previous question gets rid of it only for that day, and the same 
proposition may recur the next day, if they wish to suppress it for the 
whole of that 



  As already explained, in the House of Representatives the previous 
question is no longer used as a method of postponement (V, 5445) but a 
means to bring the pending matter to an immediate vote. The House does 
use the motion to postpone indefinitely, and in clause 4 of rule XVI and 
the practice thereunder, has defined the nature and use of the motion.




Sec. 444. Postponement to a day certain.

  3. When a  motion is 
made which it will be proper to act on, but information is wanted, or 
something more pressing claims the present time, the question or debate 
is adjourned to such a day within the session as will answer the views 
of the House. 2 Hats., 81. And those who have spoken before may not 
speak again when the adjourned debate is resumed. 2 Hats., 73. 
Sometimes, however, this has been abusively used by adjourning it to a 
day beyond the session, to get rid of it altogether as would be done by 
an indefinite postponement.



  The House of Representatives does not use the motion to adjourn a 
debate. But it accomplishes the purpose of such a procedure by the 
motion to postpone to a day certain, which applies, not to a debate, but 
to the bill or other proposition before the House. Of course, if a bill 
which is under debate is postponed, the effect is to postpone the 
debate. The conditions and use of the motion are treated under clause 4 
of rule XVI.


[[Page 220]]



Sec. 445. Motion to lay on the table.

  4. When the  House has 
something else which claims its present attention, but would be willing 
to reserve in their power to take up a proposition whenever it shall 
suit them, they order it to lie on their table. It may then be called 
for at any time.



  This is the use of the motion to lay on the table which is established 
in the general parliamentary law, and was followed in the early practice 
of the House of Representatives. But by an interesting evolution in the 
House the motion has now come to serve an entirely new purpose, being 
used for the final, adverse disposition of a matter (clause 4 of rule 
XVI; V, 5389). And a matter once laid on the table may be taken 
therefrom only by suspension of the rules (V, 6288) or similar process, 
unless it be a matter of privilege (V, 5438, 5439) such as bills vetoed 
by the President (IV, 3549; V, 5439). A proposition to impeach having 
been laid on the table, a similar or identical proposition may be again 
brought up (III, 2049; VI, 541).



Sec. 446. Delegation of consideration to 
committee.

  5. If the  proposition will want more amendment and digestion than the 
formalities of the House will conveniently admit, they refer it to a 
committee.



  6. But if the proposition be well digested, and may need but few and 
simple amendments, and especially if these be of leading consequence, 
they then proceed to consider and amend it themselves.


  In the House of Representatives it is a general rule that all business 
goes to committees before receiving consideration in the House itself. 
Occasionally a question of privilege or a minor matter of business is 
presented and considered at once by the House.




Sec. 447. Privileged motions in the Senate and in 
Parliament.

  The Senate,  in their practice, vary from this regular graduation of 
forms. Their practice comparatively with that of Parliament stands thus:



                 for the parliamentary: the senate uses:

                                            Postponement to a day beyond 
Postponement indefinite,                E   the session.


[[Page 221]]

Adjournment,                            E   the session.
                                            Postponement to a day within 


                                            Postponement indefinite. 
Lying on table,                         E   Lying on the table.


  In their eighth rule, therefore, which declares that while a question 
is before the Senate no motion shall be received, unless it be for the 
previous question, or to postpone, commit, or amend the main question, 
the term postponement must be understood according to their broad use of 
it, and not in its parliamentary sense. Their rule, then, establishes as 
privileged questions the previous question, postponement, commitment, 
and amendment.


  The House of Representatives governs these motions by clause 4 of rule 
XVI.


[[Page 222]]

1. Previous question and postpone             


Sec. 448. Obsolete provision as to priority of 
privileged motions.

  But it may  be asked: Have these questions any privilege among 
themselves? or are they so equal that the common principle of the 
``first moved first put'' takes place among them? This will need 
explanation. Their competitions may be as follows:


                    commit              <3-l  }>

                    amend                   In the first, second, and 
2. Postpone and previous question           third classes, and the first 

                    commit                  member of the fourth class, 

                    amend                   the rule ``first moved first 
3. Commit and previous question         <3-lput'' takes place.

                    postpone

                    amend                
4. Amend and previous question

                    postpone


                    commit              <3-ln }>



                                         



                                        <3-ln }>


[[Page 223]]

  In the first class, where the previous question is first moved, the 
effect is peculiar; for it not only prevents the after motion to 
postpone or commit from being put to question before it, but also from 
being put after it; for if the previous question be decided 
affirmatively, to wit, that the main question shall now be put, it would 
of course be against the decision to postpone or commit; and if it be 
decided negatively, to wit, that the main question shall not now be put, 
this puts the House out of possession of the main question, and 
consequently there is nothing before them to postpone or commit. So that 
neither voting for nor against the previous question will enable the 
advocates for postponing or committing to get at their object. Whether 
it may be amended shall be examined hereafter.


  While clause 4 of rule XVI now governs the priority of motions, these 
provisions of the Manual remain of interest because of the parliamentary 
theory they present.




Sec. 449. General principles of priority of 
motions.

  Second class.  If postponement be decided affirmatively, the proposition is 
removed from before the House, and consequently there is no ground for 
the previous question, commitment or amendment; but if decided 
negatively (that it shall not be postponed), the main question may then 
be suppressed by the previous question, or may be committed, or amended.



  The previous question is used now for bringing a vote on the main 
question and not for suppressing it.

  The third class is subject to the same observations as the second.


  The fourth class. Amendment of the main question first moved, and 
afterwards the previous question, the question of amendment shall be 
first put.


  In present practice of the House the question on the previous question 
would be put first, and being decided affirmatively would force a vote 
on the amendment and then on the main question.


[[Page 224]]

ment, if the House had it not in their power to 
postpone the whole subject.
  Amendment and postponement competing, postponement is first put, as 
the equivalent proposition to adjourn the main question would be in 
Parliament. The reason is that the question for amendment is not 
suppressed by postponing or adjourning the main question, but remains 
before the House whenever the main question is resumed; and it might be 
that the occasion for other urgent business might go by, and be lost by 
length of debate on the amend-


  Amendment and commitment. The question for committing, though last 
moved shall be first put; because, in truth, it facilitates and 
befriends the motion to amend. Scobell is express: ``On motion to amend 
a bill, anyone may notwithstanding move to commit it, and the question 
for commitment shall be first put.'' Scob., 46.


  These principles of priority of privileged motions are recognized in 
the House of Representatives, and are provided for by clause 4 of rule 
XVI.



Sec. 450. Applications of the previous question to 
debatable secondary and privileged motions.

  We have  hitherto considered the 
case of two or more of the privileged questions contending for privilege 
between themselves, when both are moved on the original or main 
question; but now let us suppose one of them to be moved, not on the 
original primary question, but on the secondary one, e.g.:



  Suppose a motion to postpone, commit, or amend the main question, and 
that it be moved to suppress that motion by putting a previous question 
on it. This is not allowed, because it would embarrass questions too 
much to allow them to be piled on one another several stories high; and 
the same result may be had in a more simple way--by deciding against the 
postponement, commitment, or amendment. 2. Hats., 81, 2, 3, 4.


[[Page 225]]

an immediate vote, makes obsolete the parliamentary rule. For 
as the motions to postpone, commit, and amend, are all debatable, the 
modern previous question of course applies to them (clause 1 of rule 
XVII).

  While the general principle that one secondary or privileged motion 
should not be applied to another is generally recognized in the House of 
Representatives, yet the entire change in the nature of the previous 
question (V, 5445) from a means of postponing a matter to a means of 
compelling 



Sec. 451. Motion to postpone not applicable to other 
secondary motions.

  Suppose a  motion for the previous question, or commitment or 
amendment of the main question, and that it be then moved to postpone 
the motion for the previous question, or for commitment or amendment of 
the main question. 1. It would be absurd to postpone the previous 
question, commitment, or amendment, alone, and thus separate the 
appendage from its principal; yet it must be postponed separately from 
its original, if at all; because the eighth rule of the Senate says that 
when a main question is before the House no motion shall be received but 
to commit, amend, or pre-question the original question, which is the 
parliamentary doctrine also. Therefore the motion to postpone the 
secondary motion for the previous question, or for committing or 
amending, can not be received. 2. This is a piling of questions one on 
another; which, to avoid embarrassment, is not allowed. 3. The same 
result may be had more simply by voting against the previous question, 
commitment, or amendment.



  Suppose a commitment moved of a motion for the previous question, or 
to postpone or amend. The first, second, and third reasons, before 
stated, all hold against this.


[[Page 226]]

  The principles of this paragraph are in harmony with the practice of 
the House of Representatives, which provides further that a motion to 
suspend the rules may not be postponed (V, 5322).



Sec. 452. The motion to amend not applicable to the 
previous question.

  Suppose an  amendment moved to a motion for the previous 
question. Answer: The previous question can not be amended. 
Parliamentary usage, as well as the ninth rule of the Senate, has fixed 
its form to be, ``Shall the main question be now put?''--i.e., at this 
instant; and as the present instant is but one, it can admit of no 
modification. To change it to to-morrow, or any other moment, is without 
example and without utility. * * *



  Although the nature of the previous question has entirely changed, yet 
the principle of the parliamentary law applies to the new form.



Sec. 453. Motion to amend applicable to 
motions to postpone or refer.

  * * * But suppose a  motion to amend a motion for 
postponement, as to one day instead of another, or to a special instead 
of an indefinite time. The useful character of amendment gives it a 
privilege of attaching itself to a secondary and privileged motion; that 
is, we may amend a postponement of a main question. So, we may amend a 
commitment of a main question, as by adding, for example, ``with 
instructions to inquire,'' &c. * * *



  This principle is recognized in the practice of the House of 
Representatives (V, 5521).


[[Page 227]]

where, and usage has drawn it after the amendment to the amendment. 
The same result must be sought by deciding against the amendment to the 
amendment, and then moving it again as it was wished to be amended. In this 
form it becomes only an amendment to an amendment.



Sec. 454. Amendment in the third degree not in 
order.

  * * * In like  manner, if an amendment be moved to an amendment, it is 
admitted; but it would not be admitted in another degree, to wit, to 
amend an amendment to an amendment of a main question. This would lead 
to too much embarrassment. The line must be drawn some-



  This rule of the parliamentary law is considered fundamental in the 
House of Representatives (rule XIX).


[[Page 228]]

he should vote in the affirmative, every 
question for more would be precluded; but at that extreme which would 
unite few, and then to advance or recede till you get to a number which 
will unite a bare majority. 3 Grey, 376, 384, 385. ``The fair question 
in this case is not that to which, and more, all will agree, but whether 
there shall be addition to the question.'' 1 Grey, 365.



Sec. 455. Filling blanks; and amendment to 
numbers.

  [In filling  a blank with a sum, the largest sum shall be first put to the 
question, by the thirteenth rule of the Senate, contrary to the rule of 
Parliament, which privileges the smallest sum and longest time. 5 Grey, 
179; 2 Hats., 8, 83; 3 Hats., 132, 133.] And this is considered to be 
not in the form of an amendment to the question, but as alternative or 
successive originals. In all cases of time or number, we must consider 
whether the larger comprehends the lesser, as in a question to what day 
a postponement shall be, the number of a committee, amount of a fine, 
term of an imprisonment, term of irredeemability of a loan, or the 
terminus in quem in any other case; then the question must begin a 
maximo. Or whether the lesser includes the greater, as in questions on 
the limitation of the rate of interest, on what day the session shall be 
closed by adjournment, on what day the next shall commence, when an act 
shall commence or the terminus a quo in any other case where the 
question must begin a minimo; the object being not to begin at that 
extreme which, and more, being within every man's wish, no one could 
negative it, and yet, if 



  The thirteenth rule of the Senate has been dropped. The House of 
Representatives has no rule on the subject other than this provision of 
the parliamentary law. It is very rare for the House to fill blanks for 
numbers. When a number in pending text is to be changed by amendment, 
the practice of the House permits to be pending: the alternative number 
proposed in the amendment to the text; a second alternative number as an 
amendment to the amendment; a third as a substitute; and a fourth as an 
amendment to the substitute. Thus, if the pending text itself states a 
number, then five alternative numbers may be pending simultaneously. 
With respect to a concurrent resolution on the budget (which is 
considered as read and open to amendment at any point and to which 
amendments must be mathematically consistent under clause 8 of rule 
XXIII), adoption of a perfecting amendment changing several figures 
precludes further amendment merely changing those figures, but does not 
preclude more comprehensive amendments changing other portions of the 
resolution which have not been amended as well (Apr. 27, 1977, p. 
12485).




Sec. 456. Priority of amendments over motions to 
strike out or agree.

  Another  exception to the rule of priority is when a 
motion has been made to strike out, or agree to, a paragraph. Motions to 
amend it are to be put to the question before a vote is taken on 
striking out or agreeing to the whole paragraph.



[[Page 229]]

  In the House of Representatives the principle that a text should be 
perfected before a question is taken on striking it out, and that an 
amendment should be perfected before agreeing to it, is well 
established. But in considering bills, even by paragraphs, the House 
does not agree to the paragraphs severally; but after amending one 
passes to the next, and the question on agreeing is taken only on the 
whole bill by the several votes on engrossment and passage.




Sec. 457. Incidental questions, like points of 
order, which intervene during consideration of the main question.

  But there  are 
several questions which, being incidental to every one, will take place 
of every one, privileged or not; to wit, a question of order arising out 
of any other question must be decided before that question. 2 Hats., 88.


  This principle governs the procedure of the House of Representatives, 
but a question of order arising after a motion for the previous question 
must be decided without debate (clause 3 of rule XVII).




Sec. 458. Matters of privilege as intervening 
questions.

  A matter of  privilege arising out of any question, or from a quarrel 
between two Members, or any other cause, supersedes the consideration of 
the original question, and must be first disposed of. 2 Hats., 88.





Sec. 459. Intervention of questions relating to reading of 
papers.

  Rule IX of the House of Representatives and the practice thereunder, 
confirm and amplify the principles of this provision of the 
parliamentary law.
   Reading papers relative to the question before the House. 
This question must be put before the principal one. 2 Hats., 88.



  This provision formerly applied in the House of Representatives to the 
reading of papers other than those on which the House was to vote. That 
was under an earlier form of rule XXX, which now applies only to the use 
of exhibits in debate. For a history of the former rule on reading 
papers and an explanation of the earlier practice, see Sec. Sec. 916-
917, infra.


[[Page 230]]



Sec. 460. Withdrawal of motions.

  Leave asked  to withdraw a 
motion. The rule of Parliament being that a motion made and seconded is 
in the possession of the House, and can not be withdrawn without leave, 
the very terms of the rule imply that leave may be given, and, 
consequently, may be asked and put to the question.



  The House of Representatives does not vote on the withdrawal of 
motions, but provides by clause 2 of rule XVI and clause 5 of rule XXIII 
the conditions under which a Member may of his own right withdraw a 
motion.