A Manual of Parliamentary Practice SEC. XXXVI: Division of the Question
by Thomas Jefferson
If a question contain more parts
than one, it may be divided into two or more questions. Mem. in Hakew.
29. But not as the right of an individual member, but with the consent of the
House. For who is to decide whether a question is complicated or not? where it
is complicated? into how many propositions it may be divided? The fact is, that
the only mode of separating a complicated question is, by moving amendments to
it; and these must be decided by the House on a question, unless the House
orders it to be divided: as on the question December 2, 1640, making void the
election of the knights for Worcester, on a motion, it was resolved, to make two
questions of it, to wit, one on each knight. 2 Hats. 85, 86. So wherever
there are several names in a question, they may be divided and put one by one. 9
Grey 444. So 1729, April 17, on an objection that a question was
complicatd, it was separated by amendment. 2 Hats. 79, 5.
The soundness of these observations will be evident from the embarrassments
produced by the 10th rule of the Senate, which says, "if the question in
debate contain several points, any member may have the same divided."
1798, May 30, the Alien Bill in quasi-committee. To a section and proviso
in the original, had been added two new provisoes by way of amendment. On a
motion to strike out the section as amended, the question was desired to be
divided. To do this, it must be put first on striking out either the former
proviso, or some distinct member of the section. But when nothing remains but
the last member of the section, and the provisoes, they cannot be divided so as
to put the last member to question by itself; for the provisoes might thus be
left standing alone, as exceptions to a rule, when the rule is taken away; or
the new provisoes might be left to a second question, after having been decided
on once before at the same reading; which is contrary to rule. But the question
must be on striking out the last member of the section as amended. This sweeps
away the exceptions with the rule, and relieves from inconsistence. A question
to be divisible, must comprehend points so distinct and entire, that one of them
being taken away, the other may stand entire. But a proviso or exception,
without an enacting clause, does not contain an entire point or
proposition.
May 31. The same bill being before the Senate..... There was a proviso
that the bill should not extend, 1. To any foreign minister; nor, 2. to an
person to whom the President should give a passport; nor, 3. to any alien
merchant conforming himself to such regulations as the President shall
prescribe, and a division of the question into its simplest elements, was called
for. It was divided into four parts, the 4th taking in the words "conforming
himself, &c." It was objected that the words "any alien merchant, "
could not be separated from their modifying words "conforming, &c." because
these words, if left by themselves, contain no substantive idea, will make no
sense. But admitting that the divisions of a paragraph into separate questions
must be so made as that each part may stand by itself, yet, the House having, on
the question, retained the two first divisions, the words "any alien merchant"
may be struck out, and their modifying words will then attach themselves to the
preceding description of persons, and become a modification of that
description.
When a question is divided, after the question on the 1st member, the 2d
is open to debate and amendment: because it is a known rule, that a person may
rise and speak at any time before the question has been completely decided, by
putting the negative, as well as affirmative side. But the question is not
completely put, when the vote has been taken on the first member only. One half
of the question, both affirmative and negative, remains still to be put. See
Execut. Journ. June 25, 1795. The same decision by President Adams.
