On motion by Mr. Hitchcock, to amend the reported amendment by striking out of the part proposed to be inserted on page 2, lines 8 to 9, the words as follows: "under the Constitution and laws made in pursuance thereof" and to insert in lieu thereof the following: The executive power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. The term of the office of President after March third, nineteen hundred and seventeen, shall be six years, and no person elected for six years after the adoption of this amendment shall be eligible again to hold the office by election. Mr. Sutherland demanded a division of the question; and Mr. Lodge raised a question of order, viz: That the amendment proposed is a proposition to strike out and insert, and is therefore not divisible under Rule XVIII. The President pro tempore (Mr. Gallinger) sustained the point of order. (See Cong. Record, pp. 2401, 2415, 2416, 2417.) STRIKE OUT AND INSERT (Also see AMENDMENTS.) SUNDAY SESSIONS. SENATE REFUSES TO SIT ON SUNDAY. 22d Cong., 2d sess.; J.. p. 239.] The Senate by a vote of 23 to 12 refused to sit on Sunday. TABLE. MARCH 2, 1833. 1. During reading of a paper a motion to lay a bill on the, entertained. 2. Motion to reconsider may be laid on. 3. Motion to direct the Sergeant at Arms to request attendance of absent Members may be laid on. 4. Motion to postpone prior orders and take up a bill may be laid on. 5. Preamble may be laid on. 6. Motion to lay on the, a motion to proceed to the consideration of a resolution to admit a Senator elect, as a Senator, not in order. 7. Motion to lay on the, an amendment to an amendment does not carry with it the original amendment. 8. The question of granting leave to withdraw a motion to reconsider may be laid on the, without carrying the motion with it. 9. Motion to reconsider vote on agreeing to a conference report may be laid on the, without carrying the report. 10. Motion to lay on the, not one of the incidental motions in order pending motion to proceed to the consideration of a bill. 1. DURING READING OF A PAPER A MOTION TO LAY A BILL ON THE, ENTERTAINED. 31st Cong., 2d sess.; J., p. 249.] MARCH 3, 1851. Pending the reading of a paper a motion to lay a bill on the table entertained, but not agreed to. (See Cong. Globe, Appendix, p. 369.) 2. MOTION TO RECONSIDER MAY BE LAID ON. 35th Cong., 1st sess.; J., p. 224.] MARCH 1, 1858. MAY 21, 1872. A motion to reconsider may be laid on the table. (See Cong. Globe, p. 901.) 42d Cong., 2d sess.; J., pp. 809, 974.] A motion to reconsider a vote on the passage of a bill may be laid on the table without carrying the bill. (See Cong. Globe, pp. 3739, 4285.) 3. MOTION TO REQUEST SERGEANT AT ARMS TO REQUEST ATTENDANCE OF ABSENT MEMBERS MAY BE LAID ON. 35th Cong., 1st sess.; J., pp. 258, 259.] MARCH 15, 1858. A motion to direct the Sergeant at Arms to request the attendance of absent Senators may be laid on the table. (See Cong. Globe, Appendix, pp. 97, 100.) 4. MOTION TO POSTPONE PRIOR ORDERS AND TAKE UP A BILL MAY BE LAID ON. 35th Cong., 2d sess.; J., pp. 383, 384.] FEBRUARY 25, 1859. A motion to postpone prior orders and take up a bill may be laid on the table. (See Cong. Globe, pp. 1362, 1363.) 5. PREAMBLE MAY BE LAID ON. 42d Cong., 2d sess.; J., p. 303.] FEBRUARY 29, 1872. The preamble to a resolution where a separate vote has been called on it on the demand for a division, and when the resolution has been agreed to, may be laid on the table. (See Cong. Globe, p. 1290.) 6. MOTION TO LAY ON THE, A MOTION TO PROCEED TO THE CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION TO ADMIT A SENATOR ELECT AS A SENATOR, NOT IN ORDER. 43d Cong., 2d sess.; J., pp. 270, 271.] FEBRUARY 15, 1875. A motion is made to proceed to the consideration of a resolution to admit a Senator elect as a Senator from Louisiana; a motion is made to lay that motion on the table; a question of order is raised: "Is the motion to lay on the table in order?" The Chair (Mr. Anthony) submitted the question to the Senate; motion decided not in order; yeas 25, nays 29. (See Cong. Globe, p. 1277.) 7. MOTION TO LAY ON THE, AN AMENDMENT TO AN AMENDMENT DOES NOT CARRY WITH IT THE ORIGINAL AMENDMENT. 43d Cong., 2d sess.; J., p. 321.] FEBRUARY 22, 1875. An amendment to an appropriation bill is pending; an amendment to the amendment is offered; a motion is made to lay the amendment to the amendment on the table under the thirtieth rule; a question of order is raised, viz: "Will not the motion to lay the amendment to the amendment on the table carry with it the original amendment?" The Chair (Mr. Ingalls) ruled that it would not. From the decision of the Chair an appeal was taken, and Chair sustained; yeas 42, nays 11. (See Cong. Record, p. 1585.) 8. THE QUESTION OF GRANTING LEAVE TO WITHDRAW A MOTION TO RECONSIDER MAY BE LAID ON THE, WITHOUT CARRYING THE MOTION WITH IT. 44th Cong., 1st sess.; J., p. 228.] FEBRUARY 23,1876. The question of granting leave to withdraw a motion to reconsider may be laid on the table without carrying the motion to reconsider with it. (See Cong. Record, p. 1235.) 9. MOTION TO RECONSIDER VOTE ON AGREEING TO A CONFERENCE REPORT MAY BE LAID ON THE, WITHOUT CARRYING THE REPORT. 44th Cong., 1st sess.; J., p. 234.] FEBRUARY 24, 1876. A motion to reconsider the vote on agreeing to a report of a committee of conference may be laid on the table without carrying the report. (See Cong. Record, pp. 1253, 1254.) 10. MOTION TO LAY ON THE, NOT ONE OF THE INCIDENTAL MOTIONS IN ORDER PENDING MOTION TO PROCEED TO THE CONSIDERATION OF A BILL. 52d Cong., 2d sess.; J., p. 89.] FEBRUARY 6, 1893. The Vice President (Mr. Morton) ruled on a question of order raised, that a motion to lay on the table was not one of the incidental motions in order pending a motion to proceed to the consideration of a bill under rule 9. (See Cong. Record, p. 1242.) UNANIMOUS CONSENT. 1. After, is given and action had on a bill, it is too late to object to its consideration. 2. Can not yield the floor to another except by. 3. Unanimous consent may be displaced by a subsequent. 4. Letter relating to the political record of Robert J. Walker, although read into the record by, can be excluded by a vote of the Senate. 5. An agreement for, not same in all particulars as a unanimous-consent agreement. 6. In order to ask for, at any time. 1. AFTER, IS GIVEN AND ACTION HAD ON A BILL, IT IS TOO LATE TO OBJECT TO ITS CONSIDERATION. 42d Cong., 2d sess.; J., pp. 850, 851.] MAY 27, 1872. Unanimous consent was asked to proceed to the consideration of H. R. 1, to revise, etc., the statutes relating to the Post Office Department, which was given. After the bill was amended, passed, and a conference asked, an objection was made to its further consideration. The Vice President (Mr. Colfax) said the objection came too late. (See Cong. Globe, p. 3893.) 2. CAN NOT YIELD THE FLOOR TO ANOTHER EXCEPT BY. 61st Cong., 1st sess.] JUNE 3, 1909. The VICE PRESIDENT (Mr. Sherman) ruled that under the unbroken precedents of the Senate a Senator can not yield the floor to another Senator, except he may yield for an inquiry; but he can not yield to another Senator for a speech, except by unanimous consent. Mr. TILLMAN. In other words, you take a Senator off the floor if one man objects? The bill (S. 7242) to protect the seal fisheries of Alaska, and for other purposes, being under consideration. Mr. DIXON. Mr. President, some years ago the Committee on Territories sent a subcommittee to Alaska, and they made a most exhaustive report on the fur seal. The Senator from Vermont (Mr. Dillingham), the Senator from Minnesota (Mr. Nelson), the Senator from New Hampshire (Mr. Burnham), and one or two other Senators, whose names I do not now recall, composed that committee; and I now want the Senator from Minnesota to make a statement. Mr. NELSON. Mr. President, in 1903 a subcommittee of the Committee on Territories, consisting of the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Dillingham), the Senator from New Hampshire (Mr. Burnham), the then Senator from Colorado, Mr. Patterson, and myself, 24143°-S. Doc. 1123, 62-335 545 were sent to Alaska to investigate the conditions in that country. Among other matters which were investigated was that in relation to fur seals— Mr. BACON. Mr. President, I rise to a point of order, which is that the Senator from Montana (Mr. Dixon) has no right under any rule or practice of the Senate to hold the floor and farm it out. The VICE PRESIDENT (Mr. Sherman). The point of order is sustained. (See Cong. Record, pp. 3271, 3274, 3275.) 3. UNANIMOUS CONSENT MAY BE DISPLACED BY A SUBSEQUENT. 61st Cong., 1st sess.] JUNE 29, 1909. Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent for the present consideration of the joint resolution reported from the Committee on Finance yesterday, proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States which shall authorize the levying of a tax on incomes. Mr. ALDRICH. I am quite willing to have that done, provided it can be agreed upon that there shall be no debate. Mr. BEVERIDGE. Mr. President, I wish to make a parliamentary inquiry. The VICE PRESIDENT (Mr. Sherman). The Senator from Indiana rises to a parliamentary inquiry. Mr. BEVERIDGE. Unanimous consent having been given, can that unanimous consent be displaced by a subsequent unanimous consent? I think that question has been raised four or five times in the Senate. The VICE PRESIDENT (Mr. Sherman). The Chair would suppose that it could, of course, and that the Senate could take any action it desired at any time by unanimous consent. * * The Chair understood that it was practically a moot question, and therefore simply announced his impression without making a distinct ruling. (See Cong. Record, p. 3916.) 4. LETTER RELATING TO THE POLITICAL RECORD OF ROBERT J. WALKER, ALTHOUGH READ INTO THE RECORD BY, CAN BE EXCLUDED BY A VOTE OF THE SENATE. 62d Cong., 1st sess.; J., pp. 158, 159.] ROBERT J. WALKER. AUGUST 4, 1911. Mr. Martine of New Jersey presented a letter of Duncan S. Walker, of New Jersey, having reference to the political record, history, etc., of his father, Robert J. Walker. The letter was read. On motion by Mr. Bailey, that the letter be excluded from the Record, Mr. Poindexter raised a question of order, viz: That unanimous consent having been given for the reading of the letter and the printing thereof in the Record, a motion in contravention of such unanimous consent was not now in order. The Presiding Officer (Mr. Brandegee in the chair) overruled the point of order, and decided that whether unanimous consent was given or not, the matter is in the Record, the paper having been read by the Secretary from the desk, therefore the question is on the motion of the Senator from Texas (Mr. Bailey) that the letter be excluded from the Record. After debate, On the question to agree to the motion of Mr. Bailey to exclude the 'etter from the Record, Yeas 49, nays 0. So the letter was excluded from the Record. (See Cong. Record, pp. 3593, 3594, 3595.) |