New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1882-06-02
THE RIGHTS or UINORITTES.

TIE RIGHTS or UIAOhiIIES.
The burden of the song of the Democratic
obstructionists who kept the House so
many DAYS from the transaction OF Its leglt-
mate business was the "rights OF the NIL
norty." They dwet upon this phase OF the
current question with such emphasis and
viyor that the listener to their imprisoned
barangues might well suppose that in their
view the perpetuty of free institutions and the
continuance of our democratic form of govern
mcnt depended in no degree upon the admis-
sion of the right OF the majority to rule, but
entirely upon the willingness OF the majority
to concede that right to the minority. Here
was n legally elected and fairly constituted
majority endeavOring in the strict exercise OF
its legitimate functions by parliamentary
methods to bring the House to the consideration
of question of the highest privilege, that OF
the right of member to his seat. The mi
norty claimed the right to say practically that
it should not be done; that this was case in
which the majority should not govern, but the
minority must have its way. The question
naturally arises, if in this why not In any or
every other case Why not reverse the natural
order and establish minority in lieu of majority
rnlc2 In order to reach the case in question
and determine finally the right OF the majority
To direct proceedings the right at any rate to
come to Il definite settlement OF the question:
a question of primary importance-who is en-
titled to take part in those proceedings, the
majority took the only course that renamed
open in so amending the rules as to put an end
TO merely dlatory and obstructive tactics.
They must either do that or surrender to the
minority. That WAS the alternative, and when
il came to that it was for them to consider
first, that they had the power beyond question;
second that they were responsible to the peo-
pie for the manner in which they exercised the
power intrusted to them and third, whether i'll
the existing emergency they would take the
responsibility of going forward and asserting
not only their right, but the justice OF their
cause, and upon that action put themselves
upon the people. They did decide to go on and
execute their own purpose, overriding the
minority as majorties always must, and even
paving no heed to the clamor about the rights
of minorties over which such hubbub has
been raised. And now what happens Will
there be- as the dismal forebOdings of the mel
ancholy Blackburn presaged, an abrOgation of
all the rules which guard the Treasury against
robbery? Shall we see the House given up by
a partisan majority to all sorts of schemes OF
iobbery Is it, as he dolefully remarked, the
entering wedge for the abolition OF all parlia-
mentary governmental BY no manner of
means Mr.. Blackburn in his most discouraged
mood never believed it. Nor does Mr.. Randall
nor Mr. Cox, nor Mr.. Carlisle, nor any other
of the distinguished statesmen who have
mopped their eyes over the approaching end of
free institutions every time they have been
denied their will, from Lincoln's call for 70 900
volunteers down to the present time. They all
know well enough that it is the business of
majority to rule, and with all their talk about
the "rights of mnorities that the principal
right" of a minority is to get along as COM
fortably as it can under the rule of the majority
and try to become majority itself rs soon as
it can. What happens now is--nothing at all
serious or alarming. but this only: the majority
having taken the responsibility OF overriding
the protest Of the minority, the latter may make
their appeal to the country.
Upon that appeal they may show, indeed
must show, in the first place, that their own
purpose was simply to maintain the right of
man to his seat who was justly entitled to 1t
and second, that the majority, in order to seat
his opponent by fraud, resorted to unusual par
liamentary expedients, chief of which was the
abrogation by majority vote of one of the
rules of the House. The majority took the
action they did with full knowledge that this
was the precise issue, and they do not shrink
from meeting it. Our prediction is that the
Democratic minority, much as they have made
of this issue in the past ten days, will not bring
it up in the next or any future campaign
They know that their opponents ready to
meet it. upon the merits of the case and to
Justify their action before the American People,
The talk about the rights of minorities to
which the House has patiently listened for sew
eral DAYS is the merest nonsense of politics
The whole question resolves itself into this
that whereas any majority has the right to its
own way and if it please to tyrannizc over n |
minority, there is a court of final resort always
and that is the American People. The tyranny
of any majority must be very brief the appeal
to the people ends it. In the present instance
it Is loudly asserted that the majority has been