National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1882-06-03
Broken on the Wheel.

nlCInDeTS cannot COnlne lJS DuSlneSS 10
calling the roll on alternate motions to
adjourn and take recess is narrowing
to the souls of the Bourbons. The latter
thought they had sure thing on dictat-
ing to the majority. They contended
that one-ffth of the House constituted
a working majority until, by the consent
of that one.fifth, they were stripped of
absolute power by an amendment of the
rules. SiXty-one members could slifle
the voice of two hundred and forty-two
members until some of the sixty.one
would consent to a curtailment of their
own power The Bourbons contended
that the rules could only be amended
by moro than a four-ffths vote If they
were sincere, then is the molo less blind
than they They quoted the Constitu-
ton, which provides (seclion 5, article y
that "the yeas and nays of the members
of either House on any question shall, at
the desire of one.ifth of those present,
he entered on the Journal" This right
has not been and will not be denied, but
the same Constitution provides that
NtNll llpNNG may NtNNllllllO viz lulto VI
its proceedings" and those rules must
determine what Question" is within
the meaning of the Constitution. 1t is
an outrageous pervcrsion Of language, and
an impeachment of the intelligence of
the trainers of the Constitution, to say
that a perpetual renewal of the motion
to adjourn or to take recess is such q
Question as entities ono-fifth of the
House to have il determined each time
by call of yeas and nays, with the
avowed purpose of preventing any ques-
ton whatever from being considered at
all. This view was presented by THE
NATIONAL REPUBLICAN during the dead
lock in the Senate last year. The Bour-
bons in that body claimed that so long
as it pleased sixteen Senators to have
the yeas and nays called on alternate
motions to go into executive session
and to adjourn the other sixty would be
powerless to have any question voted
upon. The will of the Senate on adjourn
ing or going into executive session hav-
ing been decided at the beginning ofeach
days session, renewal of either motion
until after the intervention of other bust
ness was merely obstructive, obviously
not made in good faith, and might prop
erly have been ruled out of order if the
point had been raised.
We hope the stupid old Bourbon party
will make the muzzle which has been
put over its nose u prominent issue in
the summers campaign. The people will
sympathize deeply with its orators when
they complain because the majority
claims to have more power than one
fifth. The Northern Democratic party
used to contend that a State had no right
to secede but that the Nation could not
interfere with the secession of State.
They said the laws could not be legally
resisted or maintained. The government
ought not to be shotat, but being shot at,
it could not constitutionally shoot back.
This was somewhat perplexing, and
many of the faithful are still bewildered
over the question as to how the Nation
did so much shooting, which the Demo
cratic lawyers said it could not do, ~ ~ ~,
the new Democratic ri( d,S,s1pl5ii; f E; tho old
one in the shade de-. 4gis; this: How can a
malorltyyrpAE5 the House when the rules
1,i'o%Ssthe minority to rule it? and how
I can the rules be amended by the majority
in a house ruled by minority? Or put
it this way: The rules allow perpetual
obstruction by what is known as filibus-
tering on the part of the minority. How
can the rules be so amended as
to prevent perpetual filibustcring
when the minority can, under
the rules, flibuster against abolishing
flibustering? In short, the Bourbons are
frantic with rage because they have been
snorn OF the absolute power which they
claim as divine right whether they are
a majority Or a NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS. they
are four-ffths or one-fifth. They had not
the grace to submit to authority, and they
have been broken on the wheel of the con.
stitutional prerogative of the majority tc
make rules and decide under them what
constitutes question"