The Evening critic. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1881-1885, 1881-12-22
The Committees.

result of nearly three weeks oil as haraSsinR
labor as ever befcll public man. The
task of making up committees in new
House is always onerous. But the per-
plexity is infinitely enhanced in case like
the present, where party is returning to
power after six years of minori ty, having
II scant margin of superiority and, withal,
densely overcrowded with would-be lead
crs" whose ambition exceeds their capacity.
We were not in favor of Gen. Keifer in the
contest for the Speakcrship. We believed
that he would be found lacking in legisa
tive experience, and wanting in the tact of
selection aud distribution Of men, which
comes with long service in the House and
close observation of its processes.
We were. therefore prepared to see list of
committees that would both excite the
criticism of the public and the discomfort
of the members themselves. But we
frankly confess to disappointment Gen.
Keifer has indeed organized the House on a
Republican basis. SO far as distinctively
partisan designs or measures were to be
taken into account in the makeup of the
committees to have charge of them, the
Speaker has left no room for doubt as to
his leanings. But that was to be expected,
and is not feature that we care to dis
cuss. What interest; us is the tendency of
the organization of the House as u whole,
with reference to general public topics
likely to demand attention.
The Committee on Elections is Radi-
cally Republican We hope it will not
prove proscriptively so. 1t will be called
upon to handle great many contested
cases, mainly from the South and the mar
rowness of the existing majority may
tempt the committee to try the extreme
remedy of indiscriminate custer.
If this policy is adopted the
session will be instantly plunged
into q partisan wrangle the tendency of
the Solid South to disintegrate will be ar
rested, and the rapidly growing Liberal or
Independent element in the Democratic
party will be overshadowcd and stincd by
tho Bourbon wing, which, but for the pro-
scriptions of od.time Radicalism, never
would have existed. The present policy of
the Republican party is to dissolve the
solidarity of the South by the peaceful
methods of political diplomacy. The for
mcr policy of force has long been disuscd
and with tho happiest results 1t rests with
the Elections Committee of the new House
to say whether this successful policy shall
continue or be reversed. The responsible
ity is very great one, and Brother Calkins
will do well to ponder it.
The Committee of Ways and Means is
squarely Protectionist. This is as it should
be. The Republican party won the cleo
tion of which this House is one of the
fruits by direct appeal to the people on
the question ofProtection to American Labor
and Brother Keifer has simply done the
square, manly thing in organizing Com
mittee of Ways and Means with unmis
taxable Protectionist tendencies. But hC
has not stopped with consolidating the
strength Of his own party on this issue II
the makeup of his tariff committee. II,
has in addition divided the counses Of the
Opposition. We regard his sandwiching OF
Sam Randall between Tucker and Carlisle
as n most skillful stroke of party
strategy. Mr.. Randall, representing
u Protectionist constituency, hai
been the recognized leader of Free
Trade party for ten years. This anomalous
attitude he has been able to maintain by
dodging the record whenever the issue wa
presented. Keifer has at last nailed Mr.
Randall down to the hard but fair fate o
facing the music. He must now, as th
boys say, either fish or cut bait. To CORA
Sam Randall in corner where he can
dodge is of itself feat which an olde
and wilier politician than Brother Keife
is might well be proud of. On the who'll
we consider the makeup of Ways ant
Means exceedingly adroit; calculated n
once to develop the entire strength of tn
Republican party in favor of tho protectiv
principle, and to distract and demoraliz
the forces of the Democracy in opposition
to it. We congratulate the Speaker on hi
skill.
Equal tact is apparent in the organiza
tion of the Committee on Appropriations
For some time radical difference of polio
has been growing up between the two pai
ties on the subject of appropriations t h
Republicans insisting on broad, liberia
system of public expenditure looking t
the promotion of great popular or nationa
interests and the Democrats clipging I
The old and narrow traditions of parsimon
which, however appropriate to the state
things prevailing half century ago, al
absurdly obsolete and mschievous nov
This difference of policy has been elevate
during the past six years to the dignity
a political ISSUE and has been so recognize
in at least two national campaigns-bot
favorable to the Republicans. The Speakt
evidently had this question in a
its bearings before him when |
arranged the Committee on Appropriation
1t is observed that the Republican repr,
sentation is overwhelmingly Liberal. {
nine members of the majority on the con
mttee, eight, including the chairman, al
pronounced advocates of the broades
widest liberality Of public expenditui
in all legitimate directions; while of Il
six Democrats, two, Blackburn and |
Fevre, are, to say the least, far in advan,
of the status of their party as expressed i
the popular epithet of Samrandallism
while third, Ellis, has long held ran
among the most enlightened and progres
i've Legislators OF any party. As for d