Parliamentary Lessons: based on "Reed's Rules Of Order," A handbook Of Common Parliamentary Law

ENDORSEMENT OF THOMAS B. REED.

After a careful reading of the copy,Honorable Thomas B. Reed submitted the following letter of endorsement, for publication with this volume:

October 21, 1899.

Chicago, Illinois.

Messrs. Rand, McNally & Company, Gentlemen: In commencing the study of Parliamentary Law, the first thing to do is to familiarize one's self with the expressions used in motions and proceedings. The simplest things are the hardest to find, for every author supposes these things to be known. Mrs. Lee's book meets this difficulty in a very satisfactory way, and I commend it to your consideration.

Yours very truly,

T. B. REED.

INTRODUCTION

In arranging the following set of lessons for general use, the purpose has been to demonstrate the use of parliamentary points thoroughly established by practice‚ not to show the consecutive transactions of a meeting or meetings.

All debate is necessarily assumed.

Many requests have come for a system of demonstrations and forms. To keep these forms so simple and concise as to be grasped by the novice, and so logical as to violate no parliamentary principle, has been my endeavor. For convenience the ranking of motions is reversed from the ranking of Reed's Rules, the first being last and the last first, or in the order in which they would come if written from the top of a blackboard down as they are offered. They occur in this order on the chart at the back of this book.

My thanks and acknowledgments are due Honorable Thomas B. Reed for criticism and advice.

Mary U. Lee

Parliamentary Lessons

LESSON I.

The Law of,

or Lessons on Meetings.

The working out of democracy in organized bodies requires great patience and wisdom. It requires a knowledge of that law of meetings which enables associations to carry on business legally. The law of meetings, or parliamentary law, is a system of rules under which the fair and orderly conduct of the business of a meeting may be maintained. It is a law, or set of rules, based on usage; evolved from the experience and necessity of deliberative bodies since the beginning of organization. These general rules are adapted to the special and peculiar needs of different nations. Perhaps there is nothing that so indicates the mental processes, the trend of thought, of a nation as does its parliamentary law, established always on its actual working processes. In this making of the general law of meetings two conditions are always regarded——the rights and liberties of individual members while arriving at the decision of the majority, and the common and statutory laws of the land where the association is located. Then in nearly all organizations the established law of procedure is supplemented by special rules as the common law is supplemented by statutes. These special rules are applicable to the uses of the particular body enacting them, such as rules requiring a two-thirds vote on certain questions, providing for less than a majority to order a roll-call vote or an election by a plurality vote, and other rules of conduct varying from established procedure.

Since neither men nor women are born with a knowledge of parliamentary law, and since it is not a part of an ordinary law course, or of any kind of a course, but a course of study all by itself, one requires a certain amount of preparation, or specific Study, to fit him for intelligent participation in an organized body, either as an officer or a member. Even if one is not taking an active part in the business deliberations, it requires an understanding of what is going on to determine the way he wishes to vote. And if one is active without an understanding of proper and legal procedure he is indulging in a form of selfishness most trying to patience and tolerance and most detrimental to an orderly transaction of business. It seems necessary at times to be very well informed indeed to keep up an intelligent silence. It is sometimes charged that the people who understand the rules do all the business to the great disadvantage of the ignorant ones. Ignorance is always at a disadvantage, and would if possible keep all on the same undesirable footing. Ignorance is responsible for a great deal of litigation into which organizations are plunged. A little time and effort are required to fit one for membership in organized work. But when one goes honestly about it, he sees the fallacy of the argument that a correct knowledge of business methods tends to confusion and waste of time, in other words, to unbusinesslike results. Not long ago members of a large and important society were heard to express extreme disgust at the reading of minutes that were a perfectly legal record of the transactions of a former meeting. A correct record of various motions put before the meeting and recorded as carried or lost seemed to be particularly offensive to these members, who evidently thought that the minutes of a meeting were for the entertainment of the members and should be kept in narrative style with no mention of anything so tiresome as motions.

Members make the mistake sometimes of leaving a meeting while a quorum is still present, with a feeling of certainty that the questions important to them are settled. But they should realize that questions may be rescinded and many things happen as long as the number necessary to the legal transaction of business remain; that bodies