The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1882-03-17
That Ruling.

s,av "a have In the House OF Commons
-ruie somewhat similar to the "rrevio'r
question: Of the United States and the
acl5ture- Of France. Although that mos'
famous Of all the legislative bodies In the
world consists Of more than twice as many
members as our national House OF Repre-
sentatiyes, such rule has never yet been
IN force IN that body. so as TO the Senate
al the United states. There Is no way Of
closing debate In that body except by sit
ting until the minority yield the floor from
mere physical exhaustion.
These are significant facts. What do they
means They mean that Il Is counted such
dangerous thing 70 suppress debate that
lawmakers will submit 10 innumcrablt
personal inconvenience rather than resort
10 any method Of gagging tho minority
They imply muck more-nameIy, that 10
compe, legislator 10 vote against his Will
IL high crime against liberty. But the
climax Il vet to como: for II ii be acrlme
against liberty 10 compel law-makel
IN vote when he does not wish to
vote, what language can describe the
crime OF counting representatives vote
M n n had been east when he has mol
voted nc allg But Speaker FOWLER docs
more than all this: he not only counts the
votes OF men who have not voted ana who
do not wish 10 vote, but he compels
members 10 vote who declare they are
bound in Conscience not TO vote, and not
only compels them TO vote, but counts
their votes 80 as to force them to elect per-
sons TO Offices which those members con-
scientiously believe are already filed.
The Federal Constitution gives TO the
national House OF Representatives the same
powers as to absent members which our
State Constitution gives to our House OF
Delegates. Last Monday, in the former
body the Democrats asked that an hour or
two be allowed them in which to offer
amendments to, and discuss, the Utah bill.
The Republicans refused to allow them that
privilege. They thoreupOn refused to vote,
and the House was thus left without q quo
rum. Not that the Democrats went out OF
the hall. Not at all. They remained in
their seats; and whenever motion TO adj
joun was the question. or call OF the
House was made, or any question was up
except one, they all voted and demon
strated that quorum was present. But
whenever the Utah bill came up, or the
House divided upon any question which
they did not wish to have decided then and
there, they all again refused TO vote, and
again left the House without quorum.
But no Rcpublican-not the yilest scala
wag or carpet-bagger from the SOUTHPORT
posed to compel the Democrats TO vote.
This single example ought to be conclu-
sive against Mr.. FOwLER's ruling. He
made that ruling under the impression that
the rule Of the House TO compel
the attendance OF members was meant
TO compel them TO vote after they
rot there. But that rule has no
such meaning, as il abundantly proved
by the action Of the national House OF
Representatives and Senate for one hun
drcd years. But even ii such an out
rageous construction could he given TO the
Virginia rule, d would only serve to show
that the rule itself is unconstitutional.
The fact il, however, that there is no rule
applying to elections on joint ballot. The
rule applies expressly to yea-and-nay votes,
and to the action Of each house when en-
gagged in its own proper work. 1t cannot
possibly be made, by any fair construction,
TO touch the action Of either house when
the two houses are engaged in electing
officers on joint ballot. Read the rule
again. 1t is as follows:
"Upon division OF the House on any
question, a member who is present and
fails TO vote shall, on the demand OF any
other member, be counted on the negative
of the question; and, when the YeaS and
adyS are taken. shall in addition be entered
upon the journal as present and not vot-
ing"
Can anybody seriously claim that that
rule can be tortured into any meaning
which will make it apply TO elections held
by the two houses, and elections held, too,
for State ofliccrsl 1t alludes to division
OF the House only when it is acting by it.
self. II cannot be made 10 apply to clec-
tons by both houses. Let us illustrate
One house might be Democratic and the
other Republican. Suppose the Senate had
one majority for a Republican candidate,
and the House five majority for Dem
ocratic candidate because six Republicans
refused TO vote. Now, II these Republicans
I'm the House are compelled to vote
In the "negatiye," as Mr.. FOWLER
styles it, their vote will overcome
the majority Of one in the Senate, and elect
a Republican candidate who could not have
been elected but for the wrongful ruling.
And this might be done in any election on
Joint ballot; for the rule, IL it applies at
all, does not apply merely when there is no
quorum voting, but In any and every cleo
ton. Read it again and see how Mr. Fow-
LER'sruling appears in the light Of that fact
No such result can follow II the rule be
confined to voting on bills, resolutions. &c. {;
because the vote in each house is counted
separately.
Look at 1t as you will, the ruling OF
Speaker FOWLER Is wrong, and ought
never TO be acquiesced in. We are amazed
that be should persist in 1t.
-------------------
Fun VS.. Business.