vas read the third time, and passed.

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

E.—In the earlier Congresses many simple resolutions were passed regularly through mmittee of the Whole, engrossed, and read a third time. This practice was fol

irregularly down to the second session of the Twenty-eighth Congress.

ESOLUTION AMENDING THE RULES RELATING TO VOTING HAD THREE READINGS.

h Cong., 1st sess.; J., p. 333.]

MAY 4, 1822.

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

solved, that there be added to the rules of the Senate the following rule: en the yeas and nays shall be taken upon any question, in pursuance of ixteenth rule of the Senate, no Member shall be permitted, under any cirtances whatever, to vote after the decision is announced from the chair.

HAT DO NOT REQUIRE THREE READINGS DO NOT REQUIRE THE APPROVAL OF THE PRESIDENT.

th Cong., 2d sess.; J., p. 28.]

DECEMBER 8, 1826.

solutions that do not require the approval of the President do not require readings.

AY NOT BE RECEIVED DURING PENDENCY OF ANOTHER SUBJECT.

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

AUGUST 12, 1848.

e Senate had agreed to take a recess on August 8, 1848, from 4 to 5.30 k p. m., during the remainder of the session. Before the recess on August I had under consideration H. R. 201, "to establish the territorial governof Oregon."

debate having ensued, and Mr. Johnson of Georgia, being entitled to the

e Senate by unanimous consent, proceeded to the consideration of execubusiness until the hour of 4 o'clock arrived.

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

ter the consideration of executive business,

. Mangum submitted a resolution; the reception of which was objected to ot in order during the pendency of the subject which was under consideraat the time of proceeding to the consideration of executive business.

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

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

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

was determined in the affirmative; yeas 23, nays 22. (See Cong. Globe, 76.)

52850-09-27

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 custom-house 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 consideration 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 objected 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. (Sec Cong. Record, pp. 4978, 4979-4988.)

10. MAY CHANGE CONCURRENT, OF THE HOUSE, TO JOINT. 50th Cong., 1st sess.; J., pp. 1062, 1063.]

JULY 5, 1888.

Senate changed a concurrent resolution of the House of Representatives, to amend the enrollment of the legislative, executive, and judicial appropriation bill to a joint resolution, and passed the same. (See Cong. Record, p. 5899.)

House of Representatives agrees to Senate amendments to resolution. (Same day; p. 1065; See Cong. Record, p. 5927.)

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.

51st Cong., 2d sess.; J., pp. 52, 53, 54.]

DECEMBER 24-31, 1890.

The Vice-President (Mr. Morton) decided that a resolution which has gone over one day, and has been considered on a day following and not disposed of, could only come up again on motion or by unanimous consent.

Record, pp. 833-834, 889, 890.)

An appeal was taken, but not acted on.

59th Cong., 1st sess.; J., p. 91.]

During proceedings with closed doors,

(See Cong.

JANUARY 11, 1906.

The Vice-President (Mr. Fairbanks) overruled the question of order raised by Mr. Bacon and decided that the resolution submitted by him on the 8th instant, regarding appointment of delegates to the Morocco conference, had been laid before the Senate on the 9th instant under the uniform rule of practice, and that the Senate had closed its doors on the motion to consider it in secret session, and having had its day in court, under the rule, it had been placed on the Calendar and could only be taken up for consideration upon motion or by unanimous consent.

The doors were thereupon reopened. (See Cong. Record, pp. 946-948.)

12. ON THE CALENDAR HAVE SAME RIGHTS AS BILLS. 53d Cong., 3d sess.; J., p. 25.]

DECEMBER 12, 1894.

On motion by Mr. Vest that the Senate proceed to the consideration of the resolution submitted by him on the 5th instant, instructing the Committee on Rules to report an amendment to the rules providing by proper limitations and restrictions for terminating debate.

Mr. Manderson raised a question of order, viz, that a motion to displace a pending bill under the second subdivision of Rule IX applied only to bills on the Calendar and not to simple resolutions of the Senate.

The Presiding Officer (Mr. Faulkner) sated that in the practice of the Senate, the word "bill" in this connection has always been considered to mean joint resolutions, or other resolutions on the Calendar; and ruled that the motion was in order. (See Cong. Record, pp. 240, 241.)

13. RESOLUTION TO PRINT A PAPER AS A DOCUMENT OR IN THE RECORD NOT IN ORDER BECAUSE IT EVADES THE RULE. 56th Cong., 1st sess.; J., pp. 107, 111.]

JANUARY 30, 31, 1900.

Mr. Pettigrew submitted the following resolution for consideration: Resolved, That the paper entitled an "Authentic Review of the Philippine Revolution be printed as a document for the use of the Senate. (See Cong. Record, pp. 1295, 1296.)

The resolution went over under an objection.

Mr. Pettigrew submitted a resolution embodying in full the contents of a paper entitled "The Authentic Review of the Philippine Revolution," to which objection had been made on the previous day to its being printed as a document.

Mr. Aldrich raised a question of order, viz, that, inasmuch as objection had been previously made to the printing of the paper, referred to in the resolution, it was in direct contravention to the spirit of the rules of the Senate, and was therefore not in order.

The President pro tempore (Mr. Frye) sustained the question of order. (Sce Cong, Record, p. 1328.)

RULES.

1. The original.

2. Suspension of.

3. To change the, not in order except on one day's notice.

4. Relating to amendments to, by resolution, one day's notice not necessary. 5. Violation of, by giving confidential matters to a newspaper.

Clause 2 of section 5, Article I, of the Constitution provides:

"Each House may determine the rules of its proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly behavior, and, with the concurrence of two-thirds, expel a Member."

1. THE ORIGINAL.

One of the first acts of the first organized Senate, and upon a second day that a quorum was present, Tuesday, April 7, 1789, was the appointing of a committee to prepare a system of rules for conducting business in the Senate. This committee was comprised of Mr. Ellsworth, Mr. Lee, Mr. Strong, Mr. Maclay, and Mr. Bassett.

The committee made its report on April 13, 1789, and on the 16th the Senate adopted the following:

Resolved, That the following rules, from No. I, to XIX, inclusive, be observed: I. The President having taken the chair, and a quorum being present, the journal of the preceding day shall be read, to the end that any mistake may be corrected that shall have been made in the entries.

II. No Member shall speak to another, or otherwise interrupt the business of the Senate, or read any printed paper while the journals or public papers are reading, or when any Member is speaking in any debate.

III. Every Member, when he speaks, shall address the Chair, standing in his place, and when he has finished, shall sit down.

IV. No Member shall speak more than twice in any one debate on the same day, without leave of the Senate.

V. When two Members rise at the same time, the President shall name the person to speak; but in all cases the Member first rising shall speak first. VI. No motion shall be debated until the same shall be seconded.

VII. When a motion shall be made and seconded it shall be reduced to writing, if desired by the President or any Member, delivered in at the table, and read by the President before the same shall be debated.

VIII. While a question is before the Senate, no motion shall be received unless for an amendment, for the previous question, or for postponing the main question, or to commit it or to adjourn.

IX. 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.