We have hitherto considered the case of two or more of the privileged questions contending for privilege between themselves, when both were moved on the original or main question; but now let us suppose one of them to be moved, not on the original primary question, but on the secondary one, _e. g._ Suppose a motion to postpone, commit, or amend the main question, and that it be moved to suppress that motion by putting the previous question on it. This is not allowed, because it would embarrass questions too much to allow them to be piled on one another several stories high; and the same result may be had in a more simple way, by deciding against the postponement, commitment, or amendment.--2 _Hats._ 81, 2, 3, 4. Suppose a motion for the previous question, or commitment or amendment of the main question, and that it be then moved to postpone the motion for the previous question, or for commitment or amendment of the main question: 1. It would be absurd to postpone the previous question, commitment, or amendment, alone, and thus separate the appendage from its principal; yet it must be postponed separately from the original, if at all, because the 8th rule of the Senate says, that when a main question is before the House, no motion shall be received but to commit, amend, or pre-question the original question, which is the parliamentary doctrine; therefore, the motion to postpone the secondary motion for the previous question, or for committing or amending, cannot be received: 2. This is a piling of questions one on another, which, to avoid embarrassment, is not allowed: 3. The same result may be had more simply, by voting against the previous question, commitment, or amendment. Suppose a commitment moved, of a motion for the previous question, or to postpone, or amend. The 1st, 2d, and 3d reasons before stated, all hold good against this.