A matter of privilege arising out of any question, or from a quarrel between two members, or any other cause, supersedes the consideration of the original question, and must first be disposed of.—2 Hats. 88.
Reading papers relative to the question before the House. This question must be put before the principal one.—2 Hats. 88.
Leave asked to withdraw a motion. The rule of Parliament being, that a motion made and seconded is in possession of the House, and cannot be withdrawn without leave, the very terms of the rule imply that leave may be given, and, consequently, may be asked and put to the question.
SECTION XXXIV.
THE PREVIOUS QUESTION.
When any question is before the House, any member may move a previous question, "Whether that question (called the main question) shall now be put?" If it pass in the affirmative, then the main question is to be put immediately, and no man may speak anything further to it, either to add or alter.—Memor. in Hakew. 28; 4 Grey, 27.
The previous question being moved and seconded, the question from the chair shall be, "Shall the main question be now put?" and if the nays prevail, the main question shall not then be put—Rule 9.
This kind of question is understood by Mr. Hatsell to have been introduced in 1604.—2 Hats. 80. Sir Henry Vane introduced it.—2 Grey, 113, 114; 3 Grey, 384. When the question was put in this form, "Shall the main question be put?" a determination in the negative suppressed the main question during the session; but since the words "now put" are used, they exclude it for the present only. Formerly, indeed, only till the present debate was over; 4 Grey, 43; but now for that day and no longer.—2 Grey, 113, 114.
Before the question, "Whether the main question shall now be put?" any person might formerly have spoken to the main question, because otherwise he would be precluded from speaking to it at all.—Mem. in Hakew. 28.
The proper occasion for the previous question is, when a subject is brought forward of a delicate nature as to high personages, &c., or the discussion of which may call forth observations which might be of injurious consequences. Then the previous question is proposed, and, in the modern usage, the discussion of the main question is suspended, and the debate confined to the previous question. The use of it has been extended abusively to other cases; but in these, it is an embarrassing procedure: its uses would be as well answered by other more simple Parliamentary forms, and therefore it should not be favored, but restricted within as narrow limits as possible.
Whether a main question may be amended after the previous question on it has been moved and seconded? 2 Hatsell, 88, says, If the previous question had been moved and seconded, and also proposed from the chair, (by which he means, stated by the Speaker for debate,) it has been doubted whether an amendment can be admitted to the main question. He thinks it may, after the previous question moved and seconded; but not after it has been proposed from the chair.