The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1854-06-29

Missouri Mr. BENTON II shan read say, The original
rule Cor he purpose Of showing that from the whole CON
text that part Of ii relied by the Chair WAS obviously
intended 20 apply only 10 proceedings in the House and
not 70 the COMMITTEES Of the Whole the az she
/ Onion.
These rules are contained in book printed in the year
1887. part Of the rule which am about read
the Chair but Is in different connection read il merely
for the purpose Of showing that when that rule origin
ally made 10 1921 twas intended apply only pro-
oeedings in the House and not 10 those in The Committee
i Of the Whole IL Is as follows;
when question is under debate motion shall be
eeyed bat 70 adourn 10 he on The table for the previous
question: 70 postpone 10 day certain, commit amend
TO postpone indefinitely which several motions shah have
preesdenee IN the order in which they arranged and
postpone indefinitely, being decided shall be again allowed
on the same day. and At the same stage Of the bill PoPo
shall have precedence Of motion amend and carried,
shall be considered equivalent to its rejection"
Here sir appears that the rule which the Chair has
Just decided this motion 10 be in order IS found in ime
diae connection with provisions obviously applicable
/ the House, and not the Committee Of the Whole
i Let me analyze its provisions for a When a
question Is under debate what is TO beone2 aNo mo-
ton shall be received but adjourn that be done
in committee To lie the table; that be done
4 be demanded in committee ITO postpone TO a day GER
tain that cannot be done In committee. ITO commit \;
that cannot be done in committee ITO amend that ma
be done IN committee but IN the House also ITO post
pone indefinitely that cannot be done in committee.
(which several motions shall have precedence in the order
in which they arranged" And SO the rule goes
1 q
have precedence Of motion @ amend and IL carried shall
1 be equivalent 10 its rejection
Ii is clear my mind that the rule contemplated pro-
ceedings in the House exclusively, unless suppose
that ii intended authorize Committee Of the Whole to
adjourn and demand the previous question wei 10
strike out the enacting words of bill
For these reasons contend that IL is not IN order IN
Committee Of the Whole strike out the enactng
clause Of bill and il held time during the
last Congress when myself inadvertently submitted such
motion regre, that the question has arisen al this
time for would prefer that the important questions
involved in bill under consideration should be discussed
without interruption Believing however that the motion
made by the gentleman from Tennessee Mr. JOKES Is
order shall sustain the appeal which has been Ia
ken from the decision Of the Chair
Mr. WASHBURS, Of Maine | should like TO have the
Saith rule read which adopted some twenty years after
the 18th rule and which to place this ques
ton beyond all doubt
The saith rule then read, follows
sWhen question under debate motion shall be re-
ceved but 10 adjourn lie the table for the previous
ton, postpone day certain, commit amend
cedenoe in the order in which they arranged and
motion pcstpoe TO day certain 70 commit to post
pone indefinitely being decided shall be again allowed
day ard at the stage Of the bill proposition
motion to strike out the enactng words Of bill shall have
precedence of motion amend; and, if carried, shall be
e considered equivalent to its rejection"
Mr. WASHBURN. Ii seems to be very clearly
implied from that rule that AM member in Committee Of
the Whole has right offer amendment, and speak
upon which right he certainly IL the 10Th
rule is 70 he construed the Chair has construed it II
Is clearly inconsistent with the llaih rule would like
csion of the Chair is sustained now ii is competent for
majority time whether in committee or in The
House to suspend all debate upon any question matter
how important il ay be In the House the previous que
ton can be called by majority. In the House, by ma
ority debate may be terminated any time and now,
Comitts OF the hole under this construction of Ia.
rules all debate be terminated under the ve-nuies
rule that il Is competent for majority at any time in
the House in committee stihe all discussion upon The
important questions that possibly before
the HOUSE and the country.
This is question of that character question upon
which many gentlemen undoubtedly, desire speak and
many obtain information. would like 10 say some
thing about II, and do not like the reflection that
decision made here would deprive and those interested
in the question OF the right Of expressing opinions in
regard il Of the privilege Of deriving Information
from Others This treaty NAV he II may be
which ought vote for; but want to know what it is
and know something in relation The
which have indnood the President and Senate make il
have alluded Ia this thing Mr. Chairman not perhaps
strictly in order, but showing how imporian; ques
iionsquesiions OF the deepest laportancemay up
and this decision Is enforced viii have upon
them without opportunity being offered 10 any here
say word in relation 10 them Questions involving
the existence Of the nhtonuesons of The highest import
ancquestons Of the greatest interest 10 the whole
tryrnay If this construction 81 the rule he sustained
carried through this House without sordng an opporin
nifty TO any TO say word For this reason think
that tie decision 81 the Chair cannot be consistent with the
rules Of the House be consistent with any rules
which the House at any time meant 10 adopt and can
Mr. STEPHENS, Of Georgia The rule which the gen
ternan from Maine Mr. WasHBURS cites-the Saith rule
every member when in Committee Of the Whole
a the right TO offer any amendment be may desire which
is In order and make hve-mnutes speech upon IT, u
does 10 him the right 10 offer any amendment
which Is in order Well IL this lie the rule Of the
House that member may offer amendment when il !;
in order Of IL does follow that any such right
thereby secured offer amendment and speak upon
IL when IL Is order. So much for the argument
the gentleman from Maine But the gentleman from Nir-
strike out the enacng words Of bill when in the Com
rnice Of the Whole the Of the Union The lla
rule, be says, does not apply 20 the Committee Of the
Whole This l. his position lie admits that Il does apply
10 the House.
Now Mr.. Chairman beg 70 call the attention Of The
gentleman from Virginia, and Of this committee TO the
3sh rule Of the House which expressly SAYS that ali
rules az proceedings in the House shall be observed In
Committee Of The Whole House far they may be APP
pcabie except the rule limiting the times Of speaking
Here IL Is
l34 The rules Of proceedings In the House shah be
Committee Of the Whole House
be applicable except the rule limiting the times Of speaking
april Z, 1859 - bat member shall speak twice
question until every member choosing 70 speak shall have
spoken. ~ December II, 1906
This is one Of the oldest rules Of this House
ii Mr. wASHBURN. But ask the gentleman from Geor-
gis Mr. STrrHESs whether the l34h rule docs not imply
right the part q any member to move amendment
i which il IN order
Mr. STEPHENS II does-or al least Il hes nothing IN
Il restrictive of such right
/ Mr WASEBrRN Then, il there Il another rule which
declares that amendment shall e IN order thee
rules Inconsistent
Il Mr. STEPHENS. Ifthe gentleman win allow me 10 say
Il member gets the floor and makes motion under the
rules in order which under the rules cuts Of any Other
motion amend and brings the House to vote the
question Of course there Is Inconsistency la the rules