USA > Wisconsin > The Wisconsin blue book 1889 > Part 10
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55 | Part 56 | Part 57 | Part 58 | Part 59 | Part 60 | Part 61 | Part 62 | Part 63 | Part 64 | Part 65 | Part 66 | Part 67 | Part 68
[*But the Senate of the United States is so much in the habit of making many and material amendments at the third reading, that is has become the practice not to engross a bill until it has passed - an irregular and dangerous practice, because in this way the paper which passes the Senate is not that which goes to the other House, and that which goes to the other House as the act of the Senate has never been seen in the Senate. In reducing numerous, difficult and illegible amendments into the text, the Secretary may with the most innocent intentions, commit errors which can never be again corrected.]
The bill being now as perfect as its friends can make it, this is the proper stage for those fundamentally opposed to make their first attack. All attempts at earlier periods are with disjointed efforts, because many who do not expect to be in favor of the bill ultimately are willing to let it go on to its perfect state, to take time to examine it themselves and to hear what can be said for it, knowing that after all they will have sufficient opportunities of giving it their veto. Its last two stages, therefore, are reserved for this - that is to say, on the question whether it shall be engrossed and read a third time, and lastly, whether it shall pass ? The first of these is usually the most interesting contest. because then the whole subject is new and engaging; and the minds of the members having not yet been declared by any trying vote, the issue is the more doubtful. In this stage, therefore, is the main trial of strength between its friends and opponents, and it behooves every one to make up his mind decisively for this question, or he loses the main battle; and accident and man- agement may, and often do, prevent a successful rallying on the next and last question, whether it shall pass.
When the bill is engrossed, the title is to be indorsed on the back and not within the bill. Hakew., 250. .
" The former practice of the Senate referred to in this paragraph has been changed by the following rule :
[REL# 29. The final question upon the second reading of every bill, resolution, constitutional amendment er motion, originating in the Senate, and requiring three readings previous to be:re passed, atail be. " Whether it stud bo engrossed and read a third time!" and no anendtrent shall be received for discussion at the third reading of any Mil, resolution, amendment er motion, unless by tran: mous consent of the members presert, but it sba'l ut ul te.es be in order before the final yes we of any such till. resolution, constitutional amendment of action, to there is no Mitment; and abould such commitment take place, and any amendment te reported by the committee, the maid biz resolution, constitutional amendment of motion, shall be again read a second Line, and considered as is Committee the Whole, and then the aforesani question shall be again put }
54
WISCONSIN BLUE BOOK.
SECTION XXXII.
READING PAPERS.
Where papers are laid before the House or referred to a committee, every member has a right to have them once read at the table before he can be compelled to vote on them; but It is a great though common error to suppose that he has a right toties quofles, to have acts, Journals, accounts, or papers on the table, read independently of the will of the House. The delay and interruption which this might be made to produce evince the impossibility of the existence of such a right. There is, indeed, so manifest a propriety of permitting every member to have as much information as possible on every question on which he is to vote, that when he desires the reading, if it be seen that it is really for information and not for delay, the Speaker directs it to be read without putting a question, if no one objects; but if objected to, a question must be put. 2 Hats., 117, 11S.
It is equally an error to suppose that any member has a right, without a question put, to lay a book or paper on the table, or have it read, on suggesting that it contains matter Infringing on the privileges of the House. Ib.
For the same reason a member has not a right to read a paper in his place, if it be ob- jected to, without leave of the House. But this rigor is never exercised but where there is an intentional or gross abuse of the time and patience of the House.
A member has not a right even to read his own speech, committed to writing, without leave. This also is to prevent an abuse of time, and therefore is not refused but where that is intended. 2 Grey, 226.
A report of a committee of the Senate on a bill from the House of Representatives being under consideration, on motion that the report of the committee of the House of Repre- sentatives on the same bill be read in the Senate, it passed in the negative. Feb. 28, 1758.
Formerly when papers were referred to a committee, they used to be first read; but of late only the titles, unless a number insist that they shall be read, and then nobody can oppose it. 2 Hats., 117.
SECTION XXXIIL
PRIVILEGED QUESTIONS.
[*While a question is before the Senate, no motion shall be received, unless for an amend- ment, for the previous question, or for postponing the main question, or to commit it, or to adjourn. Rule 11.]
It is no possession of a bill unless it be delivered to the Clerk to be read or the Speaker reads the title. Lex. Parl., 274; Elsynge's Mem., 85; Ord. House of Commons, 64.
It is a general rule that the question first moved and seconded shall be Erst 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.
A motion to adjourn simply takes place of all others, for otherwise the House might be kept sitting against its will, and indefinitely. Yet this motion cannot be received after an- other question is actually put, and while the House is engaged in voting.
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 oze, pro hac vice. The order is a repeal of the general rule as to this special case. When any member mores. therefore, for the Order of the Day to be read, no further debate is permitted on the ques- tion 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., 63), for priority of order gives priority of right, which cannot be taken away by another special order.
After theso there are other privileged questions, which will require considerable expla- nation.
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 ques- tion 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.
"This rule has been modified no as to specify the questions entitled to preference. The rele ! new istiowe. (When a question is under debate, no motion shall to received but in adsure, to lay on the table in puelpose inces. mitely, to postpone to a day certain, to commit or to amend; which several cotons shall have trendence in the order they stand arranged, and the motion for a jourumest shall always be in order, and to decided without dehave !
55
MANUAL OF PARLIAMENTARY PRACTICE.
1. When a proposition is moved which it is useless or inexpedient now to express or dis- cuss, the previous question has been introduced for suppressing for that time the motion and its discussion. 3 Hats., 1SS, 180.
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 session, they post- pone 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 discontin- uance of it.
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 day within the session as will answer the views of the House. 2 Hats., SI. And those who have spoken before may not speak again when the adjourned debate is resumed. Hats., 73. Sometimes, however, this has been abusedly sed by adjourning It to a day beyond the session, to get rid of it altogether, as would be done by an indefinite postpone- ment.
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 the table. It may then be called for at any time.
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.
The Senate, in their practice, vary from this regular gradation of forms. Their practice, comparatively with that of Parliament, stands thus:
FOR THE PARLIAMENT:
THE SENATE USES:
Postponement indefinite,
Postponement to a day beyond the session, Postponement to a day within the session,
Adjournment,
-
Postponement indefinite,
Lying on the table.
Lying on the table.
In their eighth rule, therefore, which declares that while the 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 the parliamentary sense. Their rule then establishes as privileged questions, the previous questions, postponement, commitment and amendment.
But it may be asked, Have these questions any privileges among themselves! or are they so equal that the common principle of the " first moved first put," takes the place among them! This will need explanation. Their competitions may be as follows:
1. Previous question and postpone. In the first, second and commit. third classes, and the amend first member of the 2. Postpone and previous question. fourth class, the rule, commit. " first moved first put " amend takes place.
3. Commit and previous question.
postpone.
amend
4. Amend and previous question.
postpone commit
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 :nais question shall not now be put, this puts the House out of possession of the main question, and corso- quently there is nothing before them to postpone or commit. So that neither voting for nar 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.
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, commit
56
WISCONSIN BLUE BOOK.
ment, or amendment; but if decided negatively (that it shall not be postponed), the mais question may then be suppressed by the previous question, or may be committed or amended.
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 pre- vious question, the question of amendment shall be first put.
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 postponement or adjourning the main ques- tion, 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 amendment, if the House bad it not in their power to postpone the whole subject.
Amendment and commitment. ['he question for committing though last moved, shall be first put; because, in truth, it farlitates and befriends the motion to amend. Scobell is express: "On motion to amend a bill, any one may, notwithstanding, move to commit it, and the question for commitment shall be first put." Scob., 46.
We have hitherto considered the question of two or more of the privileged questions con- tending 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.
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, cannot 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, com- mitment 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 good against this.
Suppose an amendment moved to a motion for the previous question. Answer: the pre- vious question cannot 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. But suppose a motion to amend a motion for postponement as to one day instead of another, or to a spe- cial 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 postpone- ment of a main question. So, we may amend a commitment of a main question, as by adding, for example, " with instructions to inquire," etc. 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 somewhere, 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 wished to be amended. In this form it becomes only amendment to an amendment.
[When motions are made for reference of the same subject to a select committee and to a standing committee, the question on reference to the standing committee shall be first put. Rule 36.]
[In filling a blank with a sum, the largest sum should 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 con-
['RUL 13. In Alling up blanks, the largest sum and longest time shall be frot put. ]
.
57
MANUAL OF PARLIAMENTARY PRACTICE.
sidered to be not in the form of an amendment to the question, but as alternative or sto- cessive 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 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 marimo. Or whether the lesser includes the greater, as in questions on the limitation of the rate of in- terest, 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 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 a number which will unite a bare majority. 3 Grey, 376, 384, 355. "The fair question, in this case, is not that to which, and more, all will agree, whether there shall be addition to the question." Grey, 355.
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.
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., &S.
A matter of privilege arising out of any question, or from a quarrel between two mem- bers or any other cause, supersedes the consideration of the original question, and must be first disposed of. 2 Hats., 88.
Reading papers relative to the question before the House. This question must be put before the principal one. 2 Hats., SS.
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 cannot 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.
SECTION IV.
THE PREVIOUS QUESTION.
When any question is before the House, any member may move a previous question, "Whether that question (called the main question) shall now be put?" If it pass in the affirmative, then the main question is to be put immediately, and no man may speak any- thing further to it, either to add or alter. Memor. in Hakew., 23; 4 Grey, 27.
The previous question being moved and seconded, the question from the chair shall be, "Shall the main question be now put? " and if the nays prevail, the main question shall not then be put.
This kind of question is understood by Mr. Hatsell to have been introduced in 1604. 1 Hats., 80. Sir Henry Vane introduced it. 2 Grey, 113, 114; 3 Grey, 384. When the question was put in this form, "Shall the main question be put?" a determination in the negative sup- pressed the main question during the session; but since the words, " now put " are used they exclude it for the present only; formerly, indeed, only till the present debate was over (4 Grey, 43), but now for that day and no longer. 2 Grey, 113, 114.
Before the question " Whether the main question shall now be put?" any person might formerly have spoken to the main question, because otherwise he would be precluded from speaking to it at all. Mem, in Hakew., 28.
The proper occasion for the previous question, is when a question is brought forward of a delicate nature as to high personages, etc., or the discussion of which may call forth obser- vations which might be of Injurious consequences. Then the previous question is proposed; and in the modern usage, the discussion of the main question is suspended. and the debate confined to the previous question. The use of it has been extended abusively to other cases; but in these it has been an embarrassing procedure; its uses would be as well answered by other more simple parliamentary forms, and therefore it should not be favored, but re- stricted within as narrow limits as possible.
Whether a main question may be amended after the previous question on it has been moved and seconded! 2 Hats., 89, says, if the previous question has been moved and seo- onded, and also proposed from the chair (by which he means stated by the Speaker for do- bate), it has been doubted whether an amendment can be admitted to the main question. He thinks it may, after the previous question Is moved and seconded; but not after it has been proposed from the chair. In this case he thinks the friends to the amendment must
:
58
WISCONSIN BLUE BOOK.
vote that the main question be not now put; and then move their amended question, which being made new by the amendment, is no longer the same which has just been suppressed, and therefore may be proposed as a new one. But this proceeding certainly endangers the main question, by dividing its friends, some of whom may choose it unamended, rather than lose it altogether; while others of them may vote, as Hatsell advises, that the main question be not now put with a view to move it again in an amended form. The enemies of the main question, by this manœuvre to the previous question, get the enemies to the amend- ment added to them on the first vote and throw the friends of the main question under the embarrassment of rallying again as they can. To support his opinion, too, he makes the deciding circumstances, whether an amendment may or may not be made, to be, that the previous question has been proposed from the Chair. But, as the rule is that the House is in possession of a question as soon as it is moved and seconded, it cannot be more than possessed of it by its being also proposed from the Chair. It may be said, indeed, that the object of the previous question being to get rid of a question, which it is not expedient should be discussed, this object may be defeated by moving to amend, and, in the discussion of that motion, involving the subject of the main question. But so may the object of the previous question be defeated, by moving the amended question as Mr. Hatsell proposes after the decision against putting the original question. He acknowledges, too, that the practice has been to admit previous amendments, and only cites a few late instances to the contrary. On the whole, I should think it best to decide it ab inconvenienti, to wit: which is most inconvenient, to put it in the power of one side of the House to defeat a proposition by hastily moving the previous question, and thus forcing the main question to be put un- amended; or to put it in the power of the other side to force on, incidentally at least, a dis- cussion which would be better avoided? Perhaps the last is the least inconvenience; inasmuch as the Speaker, by confining the discussion rigorously to the amendment only, may prevent their going into the main question, and inasmuch also as so great a proportion of the cases in which the previous question is called for, are fair and proper subjects for public discussion, and ought not to be obstructed by a formality introduced for questions of a peculiar character.
SECTION XXXV.
AMENDMENTS.
On an amendment being moved, a member who has spoken to the main question may speak again to the amendment. Scob., 23.
If an amendment be proposed inconsistent with one already agreed to, it is a fit ground for its rejection by the House, but not within the competence of the Speaker to suppress as if it were against order; for were he permitted to draw questions of consistence within the vortex of order, he might usurp a negative on important modifications, and suppress, instead of subserving the legislative will
Amendments may be made so as totally to alter the nature of the proposition ; and it is a way of getting rid of a proposition by making it bear a sense different from what it was intended by the movers, so that they vote against it themselves. 2 Hats., 19, 4, 52, 81 A new bill may be engrafted by way of amendment, on the words, "Be it enacted, " etc. 1 Gray, 190, 132.
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.