Final answer:
The proper ruling when a member wants to lay a main motion on the table until the next meeting is to advise them to make a motion to postpone to a certain time. Tabling a bill typically indicates indecision at the moment and may suspend the bill indefinitely, while postponing to a definite time such as the next meeting is more appropriate for specifying when the bill should be reconsidered.
Step-by-step explanation:
If you were the chairman at a meeting with a main motion pending, and a member said, 'I move that the motion be laid on the table until the next meeting', the proper ruling would depend on the rules of procedure adopted by the body, but in general, laying a motion on the table is meant to temporarily set aside the motion to deal with other more urgent business and not specifically to postpone it to a definite time. Under most parliamentary procedures, such as Robert's Rules of Order, if you want to postpone the motion to the next meeting, the appropriate motion would be to postpone to a certain time (or postpone definitely), not to table.
Tabling a bill in legislative assembly context typically means that the bill is put aside and may effectively be 'killed', although it can be brought back up for discussion and vote under certain conditions. However, when specifying that it should be brought up at the next meeting, that indicates an intent to postpone consideration rather than to table indefinitely. Proper practice would advise the member to withdraw the motion to table and instead move to postpone the main motion to the next regularly scheduled meeting. It would then also be important to ensure that a quorum is present when the vote takes place, as required under the customary rules.