The Washington critic. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1885-1888, 1885-12-02
TIE HOUSE RULES.

Mr. Springer of Illinois, in recent
interview touching the proposed re-
vision of the Rules of the House of
Representatives claims for the plan
which he intends to present in the
House early next week, advantages
that Congress, with justice to it5ilf or
the country cannot overlook. His ilca
is not only to relieve the Appropria-
tions Committee of the excessive bur-
den OF labor and responsibility now
devolvod upon it, but to materially re-
duce the number of other committees,
and distribute their duties in such
way as to save both time and money.
These objects are worthy of prompt
and serious consideration. If founl to
be practicable they cannot be effected
too soon. The main thing to be de-
sired is the adoption of some system
whereby the transaction of the public
business may be facilitated.
II is not of such transcendcnt i'm
portance that the services of sixteen
committee clerks, more oi less, be dis.
pensed WITH as Mr.. Springer says they
may be, unless this curtailment Of eX-
penditure has something much more
substantial to show for it than mere
cutting down of the pay-rolls; but Ger.
tainly nothing can be of higher i'm
portance or in the line of better econ
omy, than reforms which whether at
greater or less immediate cost, shall
enable Congress to fulfill its Legislative
obligations to the country and keep
vigilant watch of the interests of the
people,
1t is said that under the present rules
there is dangerous concentration of
power in the Appropriations Com
mittee. This may or may not be; but
we quite agree with Mr.. Springer that
there is a greater concentration of
power in that committee than any one
man or any fifteen men can, under all
circumstances, wisely exercise, or, in
the very nature of things, exercise with
the thoroughness and dispatch that the
exigencies of the country require.
1t is said, upon the other hand, that
the Appropriations Committee, as now
constituted, answers as a check to eX-
travagant legislation, and that the real
purpose of the reformers is not so much
to expedite the public business as to
open the way to jobs and schemes and
raids upon the Treasury, against which
the conservatism Of this committee is
an insurmountabe barrier 1t is also
stated that the controversy is rather
one of person than of principle, OF
partisanship more than patriotism, and
having for its objective point the chair
manship of the committee, with its
autocratic powers.
But the controversy is considerably
more than a competitive dispute be-
tween the pot and the kettle. 1t may
be that personal rivalries and jealousies
furnish a minor element of its inspira-
ton, but the vital question involved is
one Of the highest privilege, as affect
ing the rights and the interests and the
claims upon Congress of the whole
people.
1t is plain even to those not familiarly
versed in parliamentary usage or with
the intricacies Of parliamentary organi-
zation, that the existing rules are cal
culated TO retard and often to defeat
much-needed legislation-that they are
seemingly antagonistic to the welfare
of the country 1t is equally plain that
by more equitable assignment Of the
labor to be performed, the evils com
planned of can be measurably removed
and new system substituted for the
old, whereby all interests may be made
to receive their proper share Of atten.
tion, the wheels of legislation be accel-
Grated and even more effective safe
guards against improper expenditures
be erected than now repose in the APP
propriations Committee. Whether Mr..
Springer's intended measure is the
best than can be devised we do not un-
dertake to say, but it is in the direc
ton of reform of which large ma
jority of the Members of the House ad
nit the necessity, and, therefore, it
author is entitled to be heard in its be
half,