[Deschler's Precedents, Volume 7, Chapters 22 - 25] [Chapter 23. Motions] [D. Motions for the Previous Question] [§ 24. Effect of Adjournment] [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov] [Page 4635-4636] CHAPTER 23 Motions D. MOTIONS FOR THE PREVIOUS QUESTION Sec. 24. Effect of Adjournment Adjournment After Motion for Previous Question Sec. 24.1 Where a quorum failed on ordering the previous question on a bill under consideration on a Calendar Wednesday, and the House adjourned, the vote went over until the next Calendar Wednesday. On Mar. 7, 1935,(8) the following occurred on the floor of the House: --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 8. 79 Cong. Rec. 3121, 74th Cong. 1st Sess. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. [Frederick R.] Lehlbach [of New Jersey]: Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary inquiry. The Speaker: (9) The gentleman will state it. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9. Joseph W. Byrns (Tenn.). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. Lehlbach: Yesterday the previous question was moved on a bill then pending, and upon a division the vote was 36 to 16, whereupon a point of no quorum was made. Under the rules of the House there would follow an automatic roll call on the question of ordering the previous question, but before proceedings could be had the gentleman from New York [Mr. O'Connor] moved that the House adjourn, and the House accordingly adjourned. My inquiry is, Is the motion for the previous question still pending? The Speaker: The motion is pending and the vote will again be taken the next time the committee is called under the Calendar Wednesday rule; that will be the first business in order when the Judiciary Committee is again called on Calendar Wednesday. Sec. 24.2 If the previous question is ordered on a bill and amendments thereto, and the House adjourns, the bill becomes the unfinished business the following day and separate votes may be demanded on the amendments at that time. [[Page 4636]] On May 17, 1939,(10) the House was considering H.R. 6264, relating to public works on rivers and harbors. The following then occurred: --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 10. 84 Cong. Rec. 5682, 76th Cong. 1st Sess. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. [Joseph J.] Mansfield [of Texas]: Mr. Speaker, I move the previous question on the bill and all amendments to final passage. The previous question was ordered. Mr. [Sam] Rayburn [of Texas]: Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary inquiry. The Speaker: (11) The gentleman will state it. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 11. William B. Bankhead (Ala.). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. Rayburn: Were the House to adjourn at this time, would the present bill be pending business tomorrow? The Speaker: Answering the parliamentary inquiry of the gentleman from Texas, the Chair will state that the previous question having been ordered on the bill and all amendments to final passage, it would be the unfinished and privileged order of business tomorrow morning. Mr. Rankin: Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary inquiry. The Speaker: The gentleman will state it. Mr. Rankin: Can these individual amendments then be voted on? The Speaker: A separate vote can be demanded on them when that question is reached.(12)) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 12. See also 72 Cong. Rec. 8964, 71st Cong. 2d Sess., May 14, 1930; and 72 Cong. Rec. 7774, 71st Cong. 2d Sess., Apr. 25, 1930. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------