11. MOTION FOR, AGREED TO, BRINGS THE SUBJECT DIRECTLY BEFORE THE SENATE.

35th Cong., 2d sess.; J., p. 257.]

FEBRUARY 3, 1859.

A motion to reconsider agreed to brings the subject directly before the Senate. (See Cong. Globe, p. 784.)

12. MOTION FOR, CAN NOT BE MADE IN ABSENCE OF A QUORUM. 51st Cong., 2d sess.; J., p. 88.]

JANUARY 21, 1891.

The Presiding Officer (Mr. Blair, in the chair) decided a motion was not in order in the absence of a quorum, to reconsider a vote directing the Sergeant at Arms to compel the attendance of absent Senators. Decision sustained on appeal; yeas 23, nays 15. (See Cong. Record, pp. 1624, 1625.)

13. ANY SENATOR CAN MOVE A, WHERE THERE WAS NO VOTE BY YEAS AND NAYS.

50th Cong., 2d sess.; J., p. 340.]

FEBRUARY 18, 1889.

A question of order being raised as to the right of a Senator to move a reconsideration when he was not present at the time the vote on agreeing to a report was taken, the President pro tempore (Mr. Ingalls) stated that during the time of his service in the Senate it had been the uniform practice and custom, when there was no record of a vote upon a question by yeas and nays, to allow any Senator to enter a motion to reconsider, and unless otherwise directed by the Senate he would entertain the motion. There being no objection, the motion to reconsider was entered. (See Cong. Record, p. 2000.)

14. MOTION FOR, DEBATABLE.

49th Cong., 1st sess.; J.. p. 945.]

JUNE 21, 1886.

Mr. Frye, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following resolution; which was considered, by unanimous consent, and agreed to:

Resolved, That the last paragraph of Clause I, Rule XIII, is hereby amended by striking out the words "without debate." (See Cong. Record, p. 5944.)

NOTE. The above relates to the motion to reconsider, and before its adoption the motion was nondebatable under the rules adopted January 11, 1884, and which went into effect January 21 of the same year.

15. MAY HOLD BILL TWO DAYS TO GIVE TIME FOR MAKING A MOTION FOR.

44th Cong., 1st sess.; J., pp. 160, 161.]

FEBRUARY 1, 1876.

Mr. Ingalls rose to a question of order and stated that a bill which passed the Senate on Thursday last had not been sent to the House of Representatives, but had been retained by the Secretary for two days, at the request of a Senator who desired to enter a motion to reconsider the vote on its passage; and asked the ruling of the Chair upon the question whether under the rules of the Senate it was competent for the Secretary to retain a bill, after its passage by the Senate, at the request of a Senator, for the purpose of making a motion for reconsideration within the two days that are allowed by the rules for that purpose.

The President pro tempore (Thomas W. Ferry) stated that such had been the uniform usage of the Senate, inasmuch as the rule gives the right to reconsider within two days next following the day of the passage of the bill; but would submit to the Senate the question whether the practice hereafter shall be in conformity with prior usage or shall strictly conform to the rule. No further action.

RECUSANT WITNESSES.

53d Cong., 2d sess.; J., p. 254.]

JUNE 21, 1894. Mr. Hill moved that the reports of the special committee on the recusant witnesses, Henry O. Havemeyer, John E. Searles, and John W. McCartney, relating to the Sugar Trust, be not received.

A question of order was raised that a motion that a report of a committee of this body shall not be received is not in order. No further action had. (See Cong. Record, pp. 6639-6645, 6647, 6648.)

REGULAR ORDER.

DEMAND FOR THE, TAKES THE SENATE BACK TO THE CONSIDERATION OF THE UNFINISHED BUSINESS.

62d Cong., 2d sess.]

JULY 16, 1912.

Mr. BACON. The Senator from Wyoming [Mr. Warren] moved to proveed to the consideration of the sundry civil appropriation bill. The Senator from North Carolina (Mr. Simmons) called for the regular order, which would be the resumptiom of the consideration of the Panama Canal bill. The question was raised whether the motion of the Senator from Wyoming was or was not in order, and I understood the Chair to say, before the roll was called for the purpose of ascertaining whether a quorum was present, that it would be in order. I then rose to a parliamentary inquiry, to ascertain if the Senate upon a majority vote should sustain the motion of the Senator from Wyoming, whether the unfinished business would not thereby be displaced and on longer be the regular order, and by that vote the appropriation bill would itself become the regular order, the unfinished business.

The PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE (Mr. Gallinger). The chair will frankly state, in response to the parliamentary inquiry of the Senator from Georgia, that when the Chair ruled he had forgotten the fact that the unfinished business had been temporarily laid aside. The Chair is of the opinion that a demand for the regular order would take the Senate back to the consideration of the unfinished business. (See Cong. Record, p. 9119.)

508

RESOLUTIONS.

1. Order in which, shall be presented.

2. Simple, were read three times.

3. Resolution amending the rules relating to voting had three readings. 4. That do not require three readings do not require the approval of the President.

5. May not be received during the pendency of another subject.

6. Consideration of, if objected to on day of their presentation, may not be had.

7. Reception of, of a public meeting, objected to, and Senate refused to receive them.

8. May not discuss constitutional power to pass certain, or merits of them, on a motion to take up.

9. The consideration of, being objected to, motion to refer not in order. 10. May change concurrent, of the House of Representatives, to joint. 11. A resolution which has gone over one day and considered on the day following, and not disposed of, can only come up on motion, or by unanimous consent.

12. A, coming over from a previous day and discussed until the expiration of the morning hour, goes to the calendar.

13. That a, declaring a Senator not entitled to his seat was not a question of the highest privilege, and must stand over one day.

14. On calendar have same rights as a bill.

15. Resolution to print a paper as a document, or in the Record, not in order because it evades the rule.

16. Secretary of United State Senate may not be elected by ballot, but may be by a.

1. ORDER IN WHICH, SHALL BE PRESENTED.

49th Cong., 1st sess.; J.,

p. 102.]

DECEMBER 17, 1885.

The call for concurrent and other resolutions having been reached,

On motion by Mr. Hoar,

Ordered, That, until otherwise ordered, the Chair shall proceed with the call for resolutions to be newly offered, before laying before the Senate resolutions which came over from a former day.

2. SIMPLE, WERE READ THREE TIMES.

15th Cong., 1st sess.; J., pp. 6, 7.]

DECEMBER 1, 1817.

A simple resolution appointing joint committee "to have the direction of the money approprated to the purchase of books and maps, for the use of the two Houses of Congress, was read the second time and considered in Committee of the Whole, and reported to the Senate.

On the question, "Shall this resolution be engrossed and read a third time?"

It was determined in the affirmative.

Mr. Crittenden, from the committee, then reported said resolution correctly engrossed.

It was read the third time and passed.

On page 7 of the Journal, same day, another simple resolution was treated in exactly the same way, and passed.

NOTE. In the earlier Congresses many simple resolutions were passed regularly through the Committee of the Whole, engrossed, and read a third time. This practice was followed irregularly down to the second session of the Twenty-eighth Congress.

3. RESOLUTION AMENDING THE RULES RELATING TO VOTING HAD THREE READINGS.

17th Cong., 1st sess.; J., p. 333.]

MAY 4, 1822.

The resolution proposing an additional rule for conducting business in the Senate, having been reported by the committee correctly engrossed, was read a third time, and passed, as follows:

Resolved, That there be added to the rules of the Senate the following rule:

When the yeas and nays shall be taken upon any question, in pursuance of the sixteenth rule of the Senate, no Member shall be permitted, under any circumstances whatever, to vote after the decision is announced from the chair.

4. THAT DO NOT REQUIRE THREE READINGS DO NOT REQUIRE THE APPROVAL OF THE PRESIDENT.

19th Cong., 2d sess.; J., p. 28.] ·

DECEMBER 8, 1826.

Resolutions that no not require the approval of the President no not require three readings.

5. MAY NOT BE RECEIVED DURING PENDENCY OF ANOTHER SUBJECT.

30th Cong., 1st sess.; J., pp. 582, 583.]

AUGUST 12, 1848.

The Senate had agreed to take a recess on August 8, 1848, from 4 to 5.30 o'clock p. m., during the remainder of the session. Before the recess on August 12, it had under consideration H. R. 201, "to establish the Territorial government of Oregon."

A debate having ensued, and Mr. Johnson of Georgia being entitled to the floor, The Senate, by unanimous consent, proceeded to the consideration of executive business until the hour of 4 o'clock arrived.

Upon reassembling at half past 5 o'clock in the evening, and,

After the consideration of executive business,

Mr. Mangum submitted a resolution; the reception of which was objected to as not in order during the pendency of the subject which was under consideration at the time of proceeding to the consideration of executive business.

Mr. Niles, being in the chair, decided that the business suspended by the arrival of the hour at which the recess commenced, or the transaction of executive business by consent, must be resumed when the Senate shall have again commenced their legislative session, in preference to any other business, unless the Senate, by unanimous consent, shall determine otherwise.

An appeal was taken from this decision by Mr. Westcott; and

The question being put, "Is the decision of the Chair correct?"

It was determined in the affirmative; yeas 23, nays 22. (See Cong. Globe, p. 1076.)

6. CONSIDERATION OF, IF OBJECTED TO ON DAY OF THEIR PRESENTATION, MAY NOT BE HAD.

42d Cong., 2d sess.; J., p. 61.]

DECEMBER 18, 1871.

Mr. Conkling moved that the Senate now proceed to the consideration of the resolution this day submitted by him, instructing the Committee on Investigation and

Retrenchment to inquire into the so-called "general order business" in the customhouse in New York, and the alleged abuses and frauds therein; and

The consideration of the resolution this day being objected to by Mr. Trumbull, Mr. Trumbull raised the question whether it was in order to proceed to its considertion after such objection.

The President (Mr. Carpenter in the chair) decided that the resolution having been received in the morning hour this day, its consideration was open to objection, and, being onjected to by the Senator from Illinois, Mr. Trumbull, must go over. (See Cong. Globe, p. 194.)

42d Cong., 3d sess.; J.,

p. 98.

DECEMBER 20, 1872.

A motion to discharge a committee from the consideration of a subject must be treated as a resolution under the twenty-sixth rule, and lie over one day for consideration. The question, "Is it in order to consider the motion to discharge a committee on the day it was submitted?" was determined in the negative by the Senate; yeas 22, nays 23. (See Cong. Globe, pp. 322-327.)

43d Cong., 1st sess.; J., pp. 88-90.]

DECEMBER 18, 19, 1873.

Objections being made to the consideration of a resolution of the House of Representatives on the same day on which it was received from the House, it must, like other resolutions, under the twenty-sixth rule, lie over one day. (See Cong. Record, pp. 324, 325.)

52d Cong., 1st sess.; J., pp. 423, 424.]

AUGUST 5, 1892.

The Vice President (Mr. Morton) decided, and which decision on appeal was sustained by the Senate, that a single objection would carry over to a subsequent day a concurrent resolution submitted on a previous day and changed on the day of consideration to a simple resolution of the Senate.

The ground of the decision was that the original resolution provided for a joint committee and created a charge on the contingent fund of the Senate, and, as modified, it was in the nature of a new resolution and subject to a single objection. (See Cong. Record, p. 7071.)

7. RECEPTION OF, OF A PUBLIC MEETING, OBJECTED TO, AND SENATE REFUSED TO RECEIVE THEM.

42d Cong., 3d sess.; J.,

p. 534.]

MARCH 3, 1873.

A telegraphic dispatch presented by Vice President (Mr. Colfax); reception objected to. Motion of its reception laid on the table. (See Cong. Globe, p. 2147.)

8. MAY NOT DISCUSS CONSTITUTIONAL POWER TO PASS CERTAIN, OR MERITS OF THEM, ON A MOTION TO TAKE UP. 44th Cong., 2d sess.]

DECEMBER 5, 1876.

It was decided by Mr. Ferry, President pro tempore, that it is not in order to discuss the constitutional power to pass certain resolutions, or the merits of them, on a mere motion to take up. Decision acquiesced in by the Senate. (See Cong. Record, p. 19.) 9. THE CONSIDERATION OF, BEING OBJECTED TO, MOTION TO REFER NOT IN ORDER.

50th Cong., 1st sess.; J.,

p. 940.]

By the President pro tempore (Mr. Ingalls):

JUNE 7, 1888.

That an objection to the consideration of resolutions just submitted having been made, the motion to refer could not be entertained on this day.

From this decision Mr. Morgan appealed, and after debate he withdrew the appeal. (See Cong. Record, pp. 4978, 4979-4988.)