'The Chair has repeatedly ruled that pending a proposition to change the rules dilatory motions could not be entertained, and for this reason he has several times ruled that the right of each House to determine what shall be its rules is an organic right expressly given by the Constitution of the United States. The rules are the creature of that power, and, of course, they cannot be used to destroy that power. The House is incapable by any form of rules of divesting itself of its inherent constitutional power to exercise its functions to determine its own rules. Therefore the Chair has always announced upon a proposition to change the rules of the House he never would entertain a dilatory motion.'
"The Speaker. It will be observed that the then Speaker says he has frequently held that pending a proposition to change the rules dilatory motions could not be entertained. The precedents for ruling out dilatory motions where an amendment of the rules is under consideration are many.
"During the electoral count my immediate predecessor (Mr. Randall) decided, in principle, the point involved here. On February 24, 1877, after an obstructive motion had been made, the following language was used, as found in the Record of the Forty-fourth Congress, page 1906.
'The Speaker. The Chair is unable to recognize this in any other light than as a dilatory motion.
'The mover then denied that he made the motion as such.
'The Speaker. The Chair is unable to classify it in any other way. Therefore he rules that when the Constitution of the United States directs anything to be done, or when the law under the Constitution of the United States enacted in obedience thereto directs an act of this House, it is not in order to make any motion to obstruct or impede the execution of that injunction of the Constitution and laws.'
"While this decision is not on the precise point, it clearly covers the principle involved in the case with which we are now dealing.
"The Chair thinks the Constitution and the laws are higher than any rules, and when they conflict with the rules the latter must give way. There is not one word in the present rules, however, which prescribes the mode of proceeding in changing the standing rules except as to the reference of propositions to change the rules, with the further exception that—
'No standing rule or order of the House shall be rescinded or changed without one day's notice.'
"But it will be observed that there is an entire absence from all these standing rules of anything that looks to giving directions as to the procedure when the rule is under consideration by the House. This only refers to the time of considering motions to rescind or change a standing rule to the reference of propositions submitted by members, and to the time and manner of bringing them before the House for consideration, and not to the method of considering them when brought before the House.