mentary tactics. When the point is raised, the chair will sustain it; and the method of proceeding then will be to go on with amending the substitute until it is perfected, and then lay it on the table. The principal proposition will then be taken up for amendment; and, finally, the question will be put on the adoption of the perfected substitute in lieu of the perfected principal proposition. If the vote be in the negative, the principal proposition—while it is susceptible of no further amendment, if a bill or resolution-may still be rejected; and, if a paragraph or section, may still be stricken out.

133. The usual mode of proceeding on a motion to strike out and insert, is to read the proposition as it now stands; then, the part proposed to be stricken out; after this, that which is proposed to be inserted; and, finally, the whole passage as it would read if thus amended.

134. If errors are detected in the minutes of a previous day's proceedings, they may be corrected by motions to amend in any or all the ways indicated in this section. But members are limited to motions to correct. They may not propose amendments that do not correspond to the facts of the case. The question is not, what ought the assembly to have done, but what it did. in fact do. In moving to amend the journal, therefore, members are to act as much in the character of witnesses as of legislators.

· Division of a Question.

135. When a proposition contains two or more parts, each of which can stand by itself, if any of the parts are objectionable, they may be removed by motions to amend by striking out. A more convenient way though is by a division of the question, and a consideration of each part as a distinct proposition.

136. Unless the assembly has a special rule to that effect, the division is not ordered upon the demand of

one member; but it must be effected by vote of the house on motion in the usual way. When a member moves for a division, his motion must state into how many and, definitely, what parts he would have it divided into. For a proposition, in order to be divisible, must possess parts so distinct that if one or more should be taken away the remainder can stand by themselves, and be consistent and entire. A qualifying paragraph, an exception or a proviso, if taken from that to which it belongs, would not contain a distinct or entire proposition.

United States House of Representatives, April 19, 1852. "MR. ORR having moved to recommit the report of the Committee on Printing, with instructions, etc., MR. STUART demanded a division of the question, so that a separate vote might be had first on the recommitment and second on the instructions. The Speaker decided that the motion to recommit with instructions was indivisible, on the ground that it did not contain propositions so distinct that one failing the other could stand; if the house should refuse to recommit, there would be nothing left with which to connect the instructions. From this decision of the chair Mr. Stuart appealed; when, on motion of Mr. Orr, it was ordered that the appeal be laid on the table. So the decision of the chair was sustained.

"MR. ALEXANDER H. STEPHENS then called for a division of the question, so that separate votes might be had on the two branches of the instructions, etc. etc. The Speaker decided that the question was indivisible for the same reason that he had just decided the proposition of Mr. Stuart to be out of order; if, as the house had just sustained him in deciding, the question of recommitment with instructions cannot be divided, the instructions themselves cannot be divided, as a division will separate the commitinent from a part of the instructions, which can no more stand alone than the entire instructions. From this decision of the chair Mr. Stephens appealed; when, on motion of Mr. Cabell, it was ordered that the appeal be laid on the table. So the decision of the chair was sustained."

The same session, Feb. 11th, "MR. STRATTON, by unanimous consent, presented joint resolutions of the legislature of New Jersey, in favor of the compromise measures. The same having been read, Mr. Stratton moved that they be laid on the table and printed. A division of the question having been called for, the question was first put on the motion to lay on the table, and it was decided in the affirmative. The question then recurring on the motion to print, Mr. Giddings rose for the purpose of debating the same; when Mr. Orr made the point of order, that, inasmuch as the subject which it was proposed to print had been laid on the table, it was not now competent for the house to entertain the motion to print. The Speaker overruled the point of order. From this decision of the chair Mr.

Orr appealed; when, on motion of Mr. Hall, it was ordered that the said appeal be laid on the table. So the decision of the chair was sustained."

The Speaker might have avoided the evident incongruity by ruling, as he ought to have done, that the question was indivisible.*

137. A proposition thus divided becomes a series of propositions to be considered and acted on one after another.

138. As the opposite of the above, when the matter of two propositions had better be consolidated into one, the mode of proceeding is to reject one and then incorporate the substance of it into the other, by way of amendment.

139. In like manner, if a paragraph or section is to be transposed, the usage is by one motion to strike it out where it is, and by another to insert it in the place desired. But in this case and in that of the paragraph above, it would be better to refer the subject to a committee.

Filling Blanks.

140. When propositions are introduced containing blanks to be filled either with times or numbers, these must be filled before any motion is made to amend. To do this, the chair will entertain any number of propositions of time or number, not requiring any of them to be seconded; and put the propositions to the house, beginning with the longest time or largest number, and continue to submit them to vote in succession until a majority is obtained.

141. This principle, however, is applicable only to blanks. If a proposition contain a provision for time or number, it is liable to the common rule for amendment, viz., that any words may be struck out and any other words inserted in their place. It is in order, therefore, to strike out a shorter time or smaller num

For a contrary decision in Congress, see p. 38.

ber and insert a longer time and larger number, and vice versa.

SECT. V.-OF RECONSIDERATION.

142. The English Parliament rigidly maintains the principle that when a subject has been once decided either in the affirmative or negative, it is to remain permanently as the judgment of the house. To remedy the inconveniences that sometimes occur, it resorts to various expedients; as, by passing an explanatory act, or an act to rectify mistakes in an act, &c. In this country, in such cases, resort is had to a motion to reconsider.

143. No one is at liberty to move a reconsideration unless he voted with the majority. Were it in the power of one in the minority, the time of the assembly may be wasted by motions to reconsider questions even though they may have been decided by overwhelming majorities. By majority here is meant the prevailing party. Consequently, in the case of a tie vote, none but those voting in the negative can make the motion. (See 33.)

144. It is customary in some assemblies for a rule to be adopted prescribing the time in which the motion can be made, and the number that must be present when it is made; but, in those cases where there is no rule on the subject, the motion can be made precisely as any other motion, and it is subject to no other rules. In the absence of rule, then, it is not necessary that the same number must be present when the motion is made as there were when the vote was passed which is proposed to be reconsidered; and it would be in order at any time during the session, provided the paper has not passed out of the possession of the assembly.

145. A motion to reconsider brings up for discussion the whole merits of the subject proposed to be reconsidered. The reason is, that the motion to reconsider is a new one, "distinct both from a motion to rescind

the former vote, and from the subject of it." Should the motion prevail, the merits of the question are again brought up for discussion. Consequently, every proposition that has been reconsidered—if debatable at all-is liable to a full discussion three times when it is first proposed; when the motion is made to reconsider; and when that motion has prevailed.

146. A proposition reconsidered is again before the assembly in the form it was in immediately before it was voted on; and it is again subject to all those changes to which it was liable anterior to that vote.

147. It cannot be moved to reconsider a second time a proposition already reconsidered. But if after such reconsideration it has been so amended as to become in effect a new question, it may be reconsidered again. A motion to reconsider, if rejected, cannot be renewed.

148. It cannot be moved to reconsider a motion to lay on the table, or to adjourn. The reason is, that these motions can be renewed after the proper intervals.

In U. S. House of Rep., Feb. 4th, 1853, "The motion to reconsider the vote by which the house refused to lay upon the table the bill of the Senate, &c., &c.

"Mr. Dean made the point of order, that it was not in order to move to reconsider a vote by which the house had refused to lay a measure upon the table; the motion to lay upon the table, like that to adjourn, being one that can be made at any time, without that necessity for a reconsideration which exists in other cases.

"The Speaker stated that, while he was willing to admit that the weight of argument might be on the side of the gentleman from New York, (Mr. Dean,) the precedents were the other way, and he was not disposed to change the practice. He, therefore, overruled the point of order.

"From this decision of the chair Mr. George W. Jones appealed, when Mr. David L. Seymour moved that the appeal be laid on the table. And the question being put on the latter motion, it was deIcided in the affirmative. So the decision of the chair was sustained."

The admissions of the chair were right, and his ruling was wrong. It will be noticed, too, how common, in the proceedings of Congress, is the illegitimate use of the motion to lie on the table, as applied to appeals from the decisions of the Speaker. Nothing can