ADHERENCE.

1. Question of.

2. Bills lost after.

3. Conference granted after.

4. Conference asked by the House of Representatives after, by Senate, and refused by the Senate.

1. QUESTION OF.

The question of adherence to amendments by each House proposing the same had consideration in the First Congress.

1st Cong., 2d sess.; J., p. 131.]

APRIL 12-13, 1790.

A message from the House of Representatives: The House of Representatives do adhere to their disagreement to the amendment proposed by the Senate to the bill entitled "An act to provide for the remission or mitigation of fines," etc., in certain

cases.

(On the next day, same page.)

The Senate proceeded to consider the resolve of the House of Representatives adhering to their disagreement to the amendment of the Senate to the bill mentioned above, and Resolved, That the Senate do adhere to their amendment to the said bill." The bill was lost.

66

1st Cong., 2d sess.; J., pp. 153, 154.]

JUNE 10, 1790.

The question of adherence was considered of so much importance that the two Houses appointed a committee "to consider and report whether any, or what, further regulations are necessary for conducting the business between the two Houses," which was agreed to in the Senate.

"Resolved (4th). After each House shall have adhered to their disagreement, a bill or resolution shall be lost."

2. BILLS LOST AFTER.

5th Cong., 3d sess.; J., pp. 572, 573.]

JANUARY 22-24, 1799.

Resolved, That the Senate do adhere to their said amendments to the bill "for the enumeration of the inhabitants of the United States." Two days after the House adhered to their disagreement to sundry amendments of the Senate to the bill "for the enumeration of the inhabitants of the United States," and the bill was lost.

17th Cong., 2d sess.; J., pp. 245–248.]

MARCH 1,1823.

A joint resolution directing the printing of the Journals of Congress from the 5th day of September, 1774, to the 3d day of November, 1786, was lost, as both bodies adhered to their respective resolves on the amendment by the House of Representatives to the said joint resolution. (Annals, pp. 322, 323.)

24143°-S. Doc. 1123, 62–3– -2

17

3. CONFERENCE GRANTED AFTER.

3d Cong., 1st sess. J., p. 71.]

APRIL 29, 1794.

The House of Representatives asks a conference on an amendment adhered to in the Senate, and the Senate granted it. (Annals, p. 609.)

3d Cong., 1st sess.; J., pp. 70-71.]

APRIL 28-29, 1794.

The Senate took into consideration the resolution of the House of Representatives disagreeing to the amendment of the Senate to the first section of the bill, entitled "An act to encourage the recruiting service," and

Resolved, That the Senate adhere to their amendment to the first section of the said

bill.

The next day the House asked a conference on the amendment adhered to by the Senate and have appointed managers at the same. The Senate then resolved "that they do agree to the proposed conference." (Annals, pp. 90, 607.)

13th Cong., 3d sess.; J., pp. 657, 661.] On motion by Mr. Giles,

FEBRUARY 21-22, 1815.

Resolved, That the Senate adhere to their disagreement to the amendment of the House of Representatives to the resolutions expressive of the thanks of Congress to Maj. Gen. Jackson and the troops under his command for their gallantry and good conduct in the defense of New Orleans.

Message from the House of Representatives: They ask a conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the amendment to the resolutions expressive of the thanks of Congress to Maj. Gen. Jackson and the troops under his command for their gallantry and good conduct in defense of New Orleans, and have appointed managers on their part.

On motion by Mr. Giles,

Resolved, That the Senate agree to the conference proposed on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the amendment to the resolutions expressive of the thanks of Congress to Maj. Gen. Jackson and the troops under his command for their gallantry and good conduct in defense of New Orleans. (Annals, pp. 257-258, 262–263.)

23d Cong., 1st sess.; J., pp. 112, 113.]

JANUARY 23, 24, 1834.

A message from the House of Representatives added: "They have also passed a resolution asking a conference with the Senate on the subject matter of the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the second amendment of the Senate to the bill entitled 'An act making appropriations, in part, for the support of Government for the year 1834,' and have appointed Mr. Polk, Mr. Everett of Massachusetts, Mr. Clay, Mr. Foster, and Mr. Beardsley managers to conduct the proposed conference on their part.'

The Senate proceeded to consider the last-mentioned resolution; and,

On motion by Mr. Webster,

Ordered, That it be referred to the Committee on Finance.

Mr. Webster, from the Committee on Finance, to whom was referred the last-mentioned resolution, made the following report:

"The House requests a conference after the Senate has adhered to its amendments, to which the House had previously disagreed. It can not be denied that the Senate has a right to refuse such conference, a case exactly similar having been so disposed of by the Senate in 1826, as will be seen by the extracts from its journals which are appended to this report (vide S. Doc. No. 57), but the committee think it equally clear that such is not the usual and ordinary mode of proceeding in cases of this kind. It is usually esteemed more respectful and more conducive to that good understanding and harmony of intercourse between the two Houses, which the public interest so strongly requires, to accede to requests for conferences even after an adhering vote. Such conferences have long been regarded as the established and approved mode

of seeking to bring about a final concurrence of judgment in cases where the Houses have differed; and the committee think it unwise either to depart from the practice altogether, or to abridge it, or decline to conform to it, in cases such as those in which it has usually prevailed. It should only be, therefore, as the committee think, in instances of a very peculiar character that a free conference invited by the House should be declined by the Senate."

The committee recommend the adoption of the following resolution:

Resolved, That the Senate agree to the conference proposed by the House of Representatives on the subject matter of the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the said amendment, and that three managers be chosen to manage the said conference on the part of the Senate.

[On the following day, J., p. 114.]

On motion by Mr. Webster,

The Senate proceeded to consider the message yesterday received from the House of Representatives, asking a conference on the subject matter of the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the second amendment of the Senate to the bill entitled "An act making appropriations, in part, for the support of Government for the year 1834," together with the report of the Committee on Finance thereon; and, in concurrence with the report,

Resolved, That the Senate agree to the proposed conference. (See Cong. Globe, pp. 122-124.)

4. CONFERENCE ASKED BY THE HOUSE AFTER, BY THE SENATE, AND REFUSED BY THE SENATE.

19th Cong., 1st sess.; J., pp. 290-299, 300-302, 306, 317.]

MAY 3, 5, 6, 8, 10, 1826.

The Senate resumed the reconsideration of their amendment to the bill "to further amend the judicial system of the United States," disagreed to by the House.

On motion by Mr. Van Buren,

Resolved, That the Senate adhere to their amendment.

Following this action the House asked for a conference.

The Senate referred the request to the Committee on the Judiciary, which committee reported against granting the conference, which was agreed to; bill lost. (G. & S. Debates, vol. 2, part 1, pp. 667-671, 687, 691, 703.)

1. Amending motions for.

2. Sine die.

ADJOURNMENT.

3. Final, of a Congress, determined.

4. Motion for, pending execution of an order.

5. Motion for, over Sunday, may not be made in morning hour.

6. Motion for, when another matter is pending.

7. Successive adjournments in one motion.

8. Of both houses to day certain, with proviso.

9. Motion to determine matter before, not in order.

10. On motion for, no quorum voting.

11. On tie vote to adjourn over, Vice-President votes.

12. Resolution for final, is privileged.

13. President need not sign concurrent resolution for.

14. When business is carried over on.

15. Unreported papers on.

16. Repeating motion for, no business intervening. 17. Must be an, before legislative day terminates.

18. Roll call ordered on, must proceed.

19. Motion for, takes precedence over a motion to adjourn to a day certain. 20. When engaged in the business of electing a President of the Senate pro tempore the presiding officer may submit a motion for, or to adjourn to a day certain.

21. A motion for an, to a day certain, not debatable.

22. Notwithstanding a unanimous-consent agreement, a motion for, or to proceed to the consideration of executive business may be in order. 23. General observations on.

Section 5 of Article I of the Constitution provides: "Neither House, during the session of Congress, shall, without the consent of the other, adjourn for more than three days, nor to any other place than that in which the two Houses shall be sitting."

An adjournment for more than three days must be by concurrent resolution, which fixes the day when the adjournment shall be had and the day when it shall terminate.

The Constitution also provides (sec. 3, Art. II) that the President "may, on extraordinary occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in case of disagreement between them, with respect to the time of adjournment, he may adjourn them to such time as he shall think proper."

The President has never had occasion to exercise this latter power. Jefferson's Manual contains the following provisions:

In Section XXXIII: "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 can not be received after another question is actually put and while the House is engaged in voting."

In Section XX: "It might be asked whether a motion for adjournment or for the orders of the day can be made by one Member while another is speaking. It can not."

In Section L: "A motion to adjourn simply can not be amended, as by adding 'to a particular day'; but must be put simply 'that this House do now adjourn;' and if carried in the affirmative, it is adjourned to the next sitting day, unless it has come to a previous resolution 'that at its rising it will adjourn to a particular day,' and then the House is adjourned to that day. (Hatsell, vol. 2, p. 113.) Where it is convenient that the business of the House be suspended for a short time, as for a conference presently to be held, etc., it adjourns during pleasure (Hatsell, vol. 4, p. 417); or for a quarter of an hour. (5 Grey., 331.) If a question be put for adjournment, it is no adjournment till the Speaker pronounces it. (5 Grey., 137.) And from courtesy and respect, no Member leaves his place till the Speaker has passed on."

In parliamentary practice, especially in earlier days, it was generally laid down as a rule that "a motion to adjourn is always in order," and that the question must be decided without debate. Few, if any, legislative bodies of to-day hold fast to the first proposition, while all concur that the question is not debatable.

On March 26, 1806 (J., pp. 65-68), the Senate adopted a set of amended rules, and one of these, Rule 8, reads as follows: "While a question is before the Senate, no motion shall be received unless for an amendment, for postponing the question, or to commit it, or to adjourn; and the motion for adjournment shall always be in order, and decided without debate." This latter clause was readopted as a part of Rule 11 on January 3, 1820. (16th Cong., 1st sess.; J., p. 62.) The House of Representatives adopted a rule of this kind during the first session of the First Congress. (H. J., vol. 1, p. 9.)

When the Senate rules were revised and readopted in the second session of the Forty-fourth Congress (J., p. 122), the motion to adjourn, when a question is pending, was given precedence of all other motions, and the motion to adjourn to a day certain was given second place in the order of precedence of motions; and it was established that such motions should be decided without debate. The present practice of the Senate is the same. (See Standing Rules IX and XXII.)