Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1886-04-14

y
be would be able to show that the
same public sentiment nov demanded
that the doors should be opened, Is
rule, for the consideration u executive
nominations. His present reason that
executive nominations be considered
with open doors except when otherwise
ordered by the Senate was that senator's
themselves ought to desire that their con-
stituents should know what the Senate
was doing. The principal objection to
the proposed change was that it was
against the custom Of the Senate. That
was no argument. No great measure
Of reform had ever made progress that
it did not make it over the rsmParts OF
custom and tradition.
Mr.. Plat reviewed the history OF
secret legislative and executive SEES
sions. lie read from the early journals
Of Congress to show that the openingof
the doors Of Congress during legislative
business was regarded by senator's and
members Of the House Of Representa-
tives themselves as tending to make
members Of Congress more fully to feel
The responsibility Of their position.
1t was interesting TO note, Mr.. Pistt
said, that the first resolution offered IN
the Senate providing for the opening OF
the doors during legislative sessions
was laid on the table on motion of one
Of the then senators from Virginia, and
that at the very next session Of the Sen
ate James Monroe appeared as a sens-
tor from Virginia with specific instruc-
tons from that State to urge the open
ing Of the doors. The objections at
that time made TO the opening
Of The doors for the conduct
Of ordinary legislative business
were the same that were now
made as to the holding Of executive ses-
sions with open doors. But as mat
ter Of fact, Mr.. Plat said, there was in
these early days very little secrecy
about the proceedings Of the Senate.
The newspapers published the substance
Of them. Indeed 1t could not be said
that there was any rule Of secrecy at
that time except upon particular mat
tiers rs TO which there was special need
Of confidential treatment.
The matters OF executive business,
Mr.. Plat said, were not in early times
considered any more particularly mat.
tiers of secrecy than were matters OF
legislative business. Leaving the his
torical aspect Of the subject, Mr.. Plat
said that it was clear that it would be
DO great departure from the practices or
policy Of the fathers for senators to &C.
quaint the people with the proceedings
Of the Senate. lie mr.. Platt) planted
himself sQuarely on Mr.. Shermsn's
statement, made on February 9th last
in the Senate, to the effect that Z" there
ought to be no secrets whatever in this
Government OF ours-a government
Of the people that the statement
briefly comprehended the whole sub
ject. There was but one exception 10
be tolerated to that, and that was in
case Of absolute necessity. Such cases
would be extremely rare. Senators
demanded that the President have no
secrets from the Senate. Secrecy was,
therefore, odious TO senators except
when they themselves wanted to OBJ
serve secrecy. The people were de-
mapding Of the senators that secrecy
should not be observed by the Senate,
Just as senators were demanding that
the President observe no secrecy.
How could senators meet the in
exorable logic Of the peoples demand !:
Publicity was a cure for all the evils
affecting the body polite. The public
service would be improved by it. We
would have fewer applications from bad
men and fewer nominations OF bad men.
There was no proper ground for secrecy.
In the mere question Of convenience to
senators the essence Of argument for
executive session, he said, was the plea
by senators for personal liberty on their
part. But did not senators represent
the people: Were senators beyond
responsibility? The whole admins
trsiion Of the law in a government of
the people was involved in the appoint
ment and confirmation Of men to office.
The laws could only be enforced
through persons appointed 10 Office.
As to the point Of senatorial preroga-
tive which it was said was involved in
this question, There are two words,'
said Mr.. Plat, (which the people Of
this country want TO see expunged
from their political vocabularies. 1t is
time these words were obsolete. These
words are prerogative and privilege
and if it were not for being alliterative
| would say that there were two other
words patronage and 'perqui-
sites which the people want to go.
The people desired TO have done with
them, and the Senate had better have
done with them. This is no place to
assert prerogatives. We had better
stand pretty close to the people and
trust the people il We want them to
trust u.s." Public sentiment and the
sentiment of the press, Mr.. Plat
said, was for open sessions. OF
$4,000 newspapers in the coun-
try, fully 10000 had declared
for open sessions. Some senators might
say that they did not care what the
papers said, but Mr.. Plat said the
press represented the sentiment OF the
people. 1t was the sentiment Of the
people that senators should desire to
know. Public sentiment was easily
dlstinguishable from public clamor.
The public will was TO be the law. for
better or worse. The day would come
when the people were to be omnipotent
in the Government. With journalism
that conceded TO public men neither
honest motive nor private virtues Mr..
Plat had no sympathy; for it
be had no respect. But that was not
the press Of this country. Ii was the
country newspaper that represented the
real sentiment Of the cOuntry-the
newspaper that had no special cor
respondent here. Senators were sub
jected to a suspicion of q bargains I"
among one another, arising from con-
s,darafions of senatorial courtesy To