    [Constitution, Jefferson's Manual, and the Rules of the House of Representatives, 119th Congress]
    [119th Congress]
    [House Document 118-187]
    [Jeffersons Manual of ParliamentaryPractice]
    [Pages 208-212]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

                         sec. xviii--orders of the house

    Sec. 380. Keeping of the doors of the House.

      Of  right, the
    door of the House ought not to be shut, but to be kept by porters, or
    Sergeants-at-Arms, assigned for that purpose. Mod ten. Parl., 23.

    Sec. 381. Right of the Member to demand execution of the
    subsisting order.

      The  only case where a Member has a right to insist on
    anything, is where he calls for the execution of a subsisting order of
    the House. Here there having been already a resolution, any person has a
    right to insist that the Speaker, or any other whose duty it is, shall
    carry it into execution; and no debate or delay can be had on it.

    <> Thus
    any Member has a right to have the House or gallery cleared of
    strangers, an order existing for that purpose; or to have the House told
    when there is not a quorum present. 2 Hats., 87, 129. How

    [[Page 209]]

    far an order of the House is binding, see Hakew., 392.

      As a request for unanimous consent to consider a bill is in effect a
    request to suspend the order of business temporarily, a Member has the
    right at any time to demand the ``regular order'' (IV, 3058). If the
    regular order is demanded pending a request for unanimous consent,
    further reservation of the right to object thereto is precluded (Speaker
    Foley, Nov. 14, 1991, p. 32129; Nov. 7, 2009, pp. 27189, 27190).
    Occasionally a Member may incorrectly demand the ``regular order'' to
    assert that remarks are not confined to the question under debate. On
    such an occasion the Chair may treat the demand as a point of order
    requiring a ruling by the Chair (May 1, 1996, pp. 9888, 9889).

      Absent an existing order for that purpose, a Member may not demand
    that the galleries be cleared, because this power resides in the House
    (II, 1353), which has by rule extended the power to the Speaker (clause
    2 of rule I) and the chair of the Committee of the Whole (clause 1 of
    rule XVIII), but not to the individual Member.

    Sec. 383. Parliamentary law as to proceeding with orders
    of the day.

      But  where an order is made that any particular matter be taken
    up on a particular day, there a question is to be put, when it is called
    for, whether the House will now proceed to that matter? Where orders of
    the day are on important or interesting matter, they ought not to be
    proceeded on till an hour at which the House is usually full (which in
    Senate is at noon).

      The rule of the House providing for raising the question of
    consideration (clause 3 of rule XVI) has, in connection with the
    practice as to special orders of business, superseded this provision of
    the parliamentary law.

    Sec. 384. Orders of the day now obsolete.

      Orders  of the day
    may be discharged at any time, and a new one made for a different day, 3
    Grey, 48, 313.

      The House found the use of ``Orders of the day'' as a method of
    disposing business impracticable as long ago as 1818, and not long after
    abandoned their use (IV, 3057), although an interesting reference to
    them survives in clause 1 of rule XIV. The House proceeds under rule XIV
    unless that order is displaced by the use of special orders of business
    or the intervention of privileged business.

    [[Page 210]]

    Sec. 385. Business at the end of a session.

      When  a session
    is drawing to a close and the important bills are all brought in, the
    House, in order to prevent interruption by further unimportant bills,
    sometimes comes to a resolution that no new bill be brought in, except
    it be sent from the other House. 3 Grey, 156.

      This provision is obsolete so far as the practice of the House is
    concerned, because business goes on uninterruptedly until the Congress
    expires (clause 6 of rule XI).

    Sec. 386. Effect of end of the session on existing orders,
    especially as to imprisonment.

      All  orders of the House determine with the
    session; and one taken under such an order may, after the session is
    ended, be discharged on a habeas corpus. Raym., 120; Jacob's L. D. by
    Ruffhead; Parliament, 1 Lev., 165, Pitchara's case.

      The House, by clause 6 of rule XI and the practice thereunder, has
    modified the rule of Parliament as to business pending at the end of a
    session that is not at the same time the end of a Congress. Some
    standing orders, however, like those providing for the hour of daily
    meeting of the House (I, 104-109), expire with a session. In 1866 the
    House discussed its power to imprison for a period longer than the
    duration of the existing session (II, 1629), and in 1870, for assaulting
    a Member returning to the House from absence on leave, Patrick Woods was
    committed for a term extending beyond the adjournment of the session,
    but not beyond the term of the existing House (II, 1628).

    [[Page 211]]

    Sec. 387. Jefferson's views as to the constitutional
    power to make rules.

      Where  the Constitution authorizes each House to
    determine the rules of its proceedings it must mean in those cases
    (legislative, executive, or judiciary) submitted to them by the
    Constitution, or in something relating to these, and necessary toward
    their execution. But orders and resolutions are sometimes entered in the
    journals having no relation to these, such as acceptances of invitations
    to attend orations, to take part in procession, etc. These must be
    understood to be merely conventional among those who are willing to
    participate in the ceremony, and are therefore, perhaps, improperly
    placed among the records of the House.

    Sec. 388. The House's construction of its power to adopt
    rules.

      The  House has frequently examined its constitutional power to make
    rules, and this power also has been discussed by the Supreme Court (V,
    6755). It has been settled that Congress may not by law interfere with
    the constitutional right of a future House to make its own rules (I, 82;
    V, 6765, 6766), or to determine for itself the order of proceedings in
    effecting its organization (I, 242-245; V, 6765, 6766). It also has been
    determined, after long discussion and trial by practice, that one House
    may not continue its rules in force to and over its successor (I, 187,
    210; V, 6002, 6743-6747; Jan. 22, 1971, p. 132). Congress may bind
    itself in matters of procedure (II, 1341; V, 6767, 6768), but its
    ability to so bind a succeeding Congress has been called into doubt (V,
    6766). In one case the Chair denied the authority of such a law that
    conflicted with a rule of the House (IV, 3579). The theories involved in
    this question have been most carefully examined and decisively
    determined in reference to the law of 1851, which directs the method of
    procedure for the House in its constitutional function of judging the
    elections of its Members; and it has been determined that this law is
    not of absolute binding force on the House, but rather a wholesome rule
    not to be departed from except for cause (I, 597, 713, 726, 833; II,
    1122). In modern practice, existing statutory procedures, including
    provisions of concurrent resolutions, are readopted as Rules of the
    House at the beginning of each Congress (see, e.g., H. Res. 6, Jan. 4,
    1995, p. 462). This practice was codified in clause 1 of rule XXVIII
    (current rule XXIX) when the House recodified its rules in the 106th
    Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 75, see Sec. 1105, infra). Where
    the House amended a standing rule of general applicability during a
    session and the amended rule did not require prospective application,
    the rule was interpreted to apply retroactively (Sept. 28, 1993, p.
    22719).

    [[Page 212]]

      As to the participation on occasions of ceremony, the House has
    entered its orders on its journal; but it rarely attends outside the
    Capitol building as a body (July 25, 2002, p. 14645), usually preferring
    that its Members go individually (V, 7061-7064) or that it be
    represented by a committee (V, 7053-7056) or other delegation (May 28,
    1987, p. 14031). It has discussed, but not settled, its power to compel
    a Member to accompany it outside the Hall on an occasion of combined
    business and ceremony (II, 1139). The House typically remains in session
    for the inauguration of the President on the portico of the Capitol
    (Jan. 20, 1969, pp. 1288-92) and the mace is carried to the ceremony,
    but in one instance the House adjourned until the day after the
    inauguration of the President in response to increased security concerns
    related to a recent breach of the Capitol building, and the mace was not
    carried to the ceremony in that instance (Jan. 19, 2021, p. _).