OF ORDER IN DEBATE.
201. Debate in a deliberative assembly must be distinguished from
forensic debate, or that which takes place before a judicial tribunal;
the former being, in theory, at least, more the expression of
individual opinions among the members of the same body; the latter
more a contest for victory, between the disputants, before a distinct
and independent body; the former not admitting of replies; the latter
regarding reply as the right of one of the parties.[25]
202. It is a general rule, in all deliberative assemblies, that the
presiding officer shall not participate in the debate, or other
proceedings, in any other capacity than as such officer. He is only
allowed, therefore, to state matters of fact within his knowledge; to
inform the assembly on points of order or the course of proceeding,
when called upon for that purpose, or when he finds it necessary to do
so; and on appeals from his decision on questions of order, to address
the assembly in debate.
Sect. I. As to the Manner of Speaking.
203. When a member desires to address the assembly, on any subject
before it (as well as to make a motion), he is to rise and stand up in
his place, uncovered, and to address himself not to the assembly, or
any particular member, but to the presiding officer, who, on hearing
him, calls to him by his name, that the assembly may take notice who
it is that speaks, and give their attention accordingly. If any
question arises, as to who shall be entitled to the floor, where
several members rise at or nearly at the same time, it is decided in
the manner already described (47), as to obtaining the floor to make a
motion.
204. It is customary, indeed, for the presiding officer, after a
motion has been made, seconded, and proposed, to give the floor to the
mover,[26] in preference to others, if he rises to speak; or, on
resuming a debate, after an adjournment, to give the floor, if he
desires it, to the mover of the adjournment, in preference to other
members; or, where two or more members claim the floor, to prefer him
who is opposed to the measure in question; but, in all these cases,
the determination of the presiding officer may be overruled by the
assembly.
205. It is sometimes thought, that, when a member, in the course of
debate, breaks off his speech, and gives up the floor to another for a
particular purpose, he is entitled to it again, as of right, when that
purpose is accomplished; but, though this is generally conceded, yet,
when a member gives up the floor for one purpose, he does so for all;
and it is not possible for the presiding officer to take notice of and
enforce agreements of this nature between members.
206. No person, in speaking, is to mention a member then present by
his name; but to describe him by his seat in the assembly, or as the
member who spoke last, or last but one, or on the other side of the
question, or by some other equivalent expression. The purpose of this
rule is to guard as much as possible against the excitement of all
personal feeling, either of favor or of hostility, by separating, as
it were, the official from the personal character of each member, and
having regard to the former only in the debate.
207. If the presiding officer rises up to speak, any other member, who
may have risen for the same purpose, ought to sit down, in order that
the former may be first heard; but this rule does not authorize the
presiding officer to interrupt a member, whilst speaking, or to cut
off one to whom he has given the floor; he must wait like other
members until such member has done speaking.
208. A member, whilst speaking, must remain standing in his place,
uncovered; and, when he has finished his speech, he ought to resume
his seat; but if unable to stand without pain or inconvenience, in
consequence of age, sickness, or other infirmity, he may be indulged
to speak sitting.
Sect. II. As to the Matter in Speaking.
209. Every question, that can be made in a deliberative assembly, is
susceptible of being debated,[27] according to its nature; that is,
every member has the right of expressing his opinion upon it. Hence,
it is a general rule, and the principal one relating to this matter,
that, in debate, those who speak are to confine themselves to the
question, and not to speak impertinently, or beside the subject. So
long as a member has the floor, and keeps within the rule, he may
speak for as long a time as he pleases; though, if an uninteresting
speaker trespasses too much upon the time and patience of the
assembly, the members seldom fail to show their dissatisfaction in
some way or other, which induces him to bring his remarks to a close.
210. It is also a rule, that no person, in speaking, is to use
indecent language against the proceedings of the assembly, or to
reflect upon any of its prior determinations, unless he means to
conclude his remarks with a motion to rescind such determination; but
while a proposition under consideration is still pending, and not
adopted, though it may have been reported by a committee, reflections
on it are no reflections on the assembly. The rule applies equally to
the proceedings of committees; which are, indeed, the proceedings of
the assembly.
211. Another rule in speaking is, that no member is at liberty to
digress from the matter of the question, to fall upon the person of
another, and to speak reviling, nipping, or unmannerly words of or to
him. The nature or consequences of a measure may be reprobated in
strong terms; but to arraign the motives of those who advocate it, is
a personality and against order.
212. It is very often an extremely difficult and delicate matter to
decide whether the remarks of a member are pertinent or relevant to
the question; but it will, in general, be safe for the presiding
officer to consider them so, unless they very clearly reflect, in an
improper manner, either upon the person or motives of a member, or
upon the proceedings of the assembly; or the member speaking digresses
from or manifestly mistakes the question.
213. It often happens in the consideration of a subject, that, whilst
the general question remains the same, the particular question before
the assembly is constantly changing; thus, while, for example, the
general question is on the adoption of a series of resolutions, the
particular question may, at one moment, be on an amendment; at another
on postponement; and, again, on the previous question. In all these
cases, the particular question supersedes, for the time, the main
question; and those who speak to it must confine their remarks
accordingly. The enforcement of order, in this respect, requires the
closest attention on the part of the presiding officer.
214. When a member is interrupted by the presiding officer, or called
to order by a member,[28] for irrelevancy or departing from the
question, a question may be made as to whether he shall be allowed to
proceed in his remarks, in the manner he was speaking when he was
interrupted; but, if no question is made, or if one is made and
decided in the negative, he is still to be allowed to proceed in
order, that is, abandoning the objectionable course of remark.
Sect. III. As to Times of speaking.
215. The general rule, in all deliberative assemblies, unless it is
otherwise specially provided, is, that no member shall speak more than
once to the same question;[29] although the debate on that question
may be adjourned and continued through several days; and, although a
member, who desires to speak a second time, has, in the course of the
debate, changed his opinion.
216. This rule refers to the same question, technically considered;
for, if a resolution is moved and debated, and then referred to a
committee, those who speak on the introduction of the motion may speak
again on the question presented by the report of the committee, though
it is substantially the same question with the former; and, so,
members, who have spoken on the principal or main question, may speak
again on all the subsidiary or incidental questions arising in the
course of the debate.
217. The rule, as to speaking but once on a question, if strictly
enforced, will prevent a member from speaking a second time without
the general consent of the assembly, so long as there is any other
member who himself desires to speak; but, when all who desire to speak
have spoken, a member may speak a second time by leave of the
assembly.
218. A member may also be permitted to speak a second time, in the
same debate, in order to clear a matter of fact; or merely to explain
himself in some material part of his speech; or to the orders of the
assembly, if they be transgressed (although no question may be made),
but carefully keeping within that line and not falling into the matter
itself.
219. It is sometimes supposed, that, because a member has a right to
explain himself, he therefore has a right to interrupt another member
whilst speaking, in order to make the explanation: but this is a
mistake; he should wait until the member speaking has finished; and if
a member, on being requested, yields the floor for an explanation, he
relinquishes it altogether.
Sect. IV. As to stopping Debate.
220. The only mode in use, in this country, until recently, for the
purpose of putting an end to an unprofitable or tiresome debate, was
by moving the previous question; the effect of which motion, as
already explained, if decided in the affirmative, is to require the
main or principal question to be immediately taken. When this question
is moved, therefore, it necessarily suspends all further consideration
of the main question, and precludes all further debate or amendment of
it; though, as has been seen, it stands in the same degree with
postponement, amendment, and commitment; and, unless in virtue of a
special rule, cannot be moved while either of those motions is
pending.
221. The other mode of putting an end to debate, which has recently
been introduced into use, is for the assembly to adopt beforehand a
special order in reference to a particular subject, that, at such a
time specified, all debate upon it shall cease, and all motions or
questions pending in relation to it shall be decided.
222. Another rule, which has lately been introduced for the purpose of
shortening rather than stopping debate, is, that no member shall be
permitted to speak more than a certain specified time on any question;
so that, when the time allotted has expired, the presiding officer
announces the fact, and the member speaking resumes his seat.[30]
Sect. V. As to Decorum in Debate.
223. Every member having the right to be heard, every other member is
bound to conduct himself in such a manner, that this right may be
effectual. Hence, it is a rule of order, as well as of decency, that
no member is to disturb another in his speech by hissing, coughing,
spitting; by speaking, or whispering; by passing between the presiding
officer and the member speaking; by going across the assembly-room, or
walking up and down in it; or by any other disorderly deportment,
which tends to disturb or disconcert a member who is speaking.
224. But, if a member speaking finds, that he is not regarded with
that respectful attention, which his equal right demands,—that it is
not the inclination of the assembly to hear him,—and that by
conversation or any other noise they endeavor to drown his voice,—it
is his most prudent course to submit himself to the pleasure of the
assembly, and to sit down; for it scarcely ever happens, that the
members of the assembly are guilty of this piece of ill-manners,
without some excuse or provocation, or that they are so wholly
inattentive to one, who says anything worth their hearing.
225. It is the duty of the presiding officer, in such a case, to
endeavor to reduce the assembly to order and decorum; but, if his
repeated calls to order, and his appeals to the good sense and decency
of the members, prove ineffectual, it then becomes his duty to call by
name any member who obstinately persists in irregularity; whereupon
the assembly may require such member to withdraw; who is then to be
heard, if he desires it, in exculpation, and to withdraw; then the
presiding officer states the offence committed, and the assembly
considers of the kind and degree of punishment to be inflicted.
226. If, on repeated trials, the presiding officer finds that the
assembly will not support him in the exercise of his authority, he
will then be justified, but not till then, in permitting, without
censure, every kind of disorder.
Sect. VI. As to Disorderly Words.
227. If a member, in speaking, makes use of language, which is
personally offensive to another, or insulting to the assembly, and the
member offended, or any other, thinks proper to complain of it to the
assembly, the course of proceedings is as follows:
228. The member speaking is immediately interrupted in the course of
his speech, by another or several members rising and calling to order;
and, the member, who objects or complains of the words, is then called
upon by the presiding officer to state the words which he complains
of, repeating them exactly as he conceives them to have been spoken,
in order that they may be reduced to writing by the clerk; or the
member complaining, without being so called upon, may proceed at once
to state the words either verbally or in writing, and desire that the
clerk may take them down at the table. The presiding officer may then
direct the clerk to take them down; but if he sees the objection to be
a trivial one, and thinks there is no foundation for their being
thought disorderly, he will prudently delay giving any such
directions, in order not unnecessarily to interrupt the proceedings;
though if the members generally seem to be in favor of having the
words taken down, by calling out to that effect, or by a vote, which
the assembly may doubtless pass, the presiding officer should
certainly order the clerk to take them down, in the form and manner in
which they are stated by the member who objects.
229. The words objected to being thus written down, and forming a part
of the minutes in the clerk’s book, they are next to be read to the
member who was speaking, who may deny that those are the words which
he spoke, in which case, the assembly must decide by a question,
whether they are the words or not.[31] If he does not deny that he
spoke those words, or when the assembly has itself determined what the
words are, then the member may either justify them, or explain the
sense in which he used them, so as to remove the objection of their
being disorderly; or he may make an apology for them.
230. If the justification, or explanation, or apology, of the member,
is thought sufficient by the assembly, no further proceeding is
necessary; the member may resume and go on with his speech, the
assembly being presumed, unless some further motion is made, to be
satisfied; but if any two members (one to make and the other to second
the motion) think it necessary to state a question, so as to take the
sense of the assembly upon the words, and whether the member in using
them has been guilty of any offence towards the assembly, the member
must withdraw before that question is stated; and then the sense of
the assembly must be taken, and such further proceedings had in
relation to punishing the member, as may be thought necessary and
proper.
231. The above is the course of proceeding established by the writers
of greatest authority,[32] and ought invariably to be pursued; it
might however be improved, by the member who objects to words writing
them down at once, and thereupon moving that they be made a part of
the minutes; by which means, the presiding officer would be relieved
from the responsibility of determining, in the first instance, upon
the character of the words.
232. If offensive words are not taken notice of at the time they are
spoken,[33] but the member is allowed to finish his speech, and then
any other person speaks, or any other matter of business intervenes,
before notice is taken of the words which gave offence, the words are
not to be written down, or the member using them censured. This rule
is established for the common security of all the members; and to
prevent the mistakes which must necessarily happen, if words
complained of are not immediately reduced to writing.
25. An exception to this rule is sometimes made in favor of the mover
of a question, who is allowed, at the close of the debate, to
reply to the arguments brought against his motion; but this is a
matter of favor and indulgence, and not of right.
26. Sometimes a member, instead of proposing his motion, at first,
proceeds with his speech; but in such a case, he is liable to be
taken down to order, unless he states that he intends to conclude
with a motion, and informs the assembly what that motion is, and
then he may be allowed to proceed.
27. In legislative bodies, it is usual to provide, that certain
questions as, for example, to adjourn, to lie on the table, for
the previous question, or, as to the order of business, shall be
decided without debate.
28. “In the latter event, the member will rise, and addressing himself
to the presiding officer, will say, ‘I rise to a point of order.’
When requested by the chair to state it, he will specify the thing
he objects to. If the chair rules that the member is out of order
in his remarks, and no appeal is taken from the decision, he will
abandon the line of remark condemned, and, if permitted, proceed
in order.
“Should an appeal be taken, it will be decided without
debate.”—Ed.
29. The mover and seconder, if they do not speak to the question, at
the time when the motion is made and seconded, have the same right
with other members to address the assembly.
30. “In the House of Commons, England, ever since the Irish
Parliamentary Party proved strong enough to combat with the
Opposition by obstructing all bills in the endeavor to procure
‘Home Rule’ for Ireland there has been nothing but turmoil over
every bill proposed; to stop this the ‘Government Party’ passed a
rule which was applied whenever obstruction or debate was carried
too far; this was called ‘Cloture.’ It is used as a ‘gag’ law, as
when ‘Cloture’ is moved every thing or motion is subordinated to
the motion in favor of which ‘Cloture’ was applied.”—Ed.
—Also see note on page 163.
31. The words, as written down, may be amended, so as to conform to
what the assembly thinks to be the truth.
32. Mr. Hatsell, in England, and Mr. Jefferson, in this country.
33. Mr. Jefferson (§ 17) lays it down, that “disorderly words are not
to be noticed till the member has finished his speech.” But in
this, he is contradicted by Hatsell, as well as by the general
practice of legislative bodies.