Evening journal. [volume] (Wilmington, Del.) 1888-1932, 1890-08-01
SPEAKER REEDS STAND.
He Answers ak. NJ. c." in The
North American Review.


He Says the Consent Of Quorum May
Es as Thoroughly Expressed by silence
as by sound = His Position ON Yea
aad Nay Vote.
WAsHTEGToN, Aug. This weeks North
american Review will publish Speaker
3eedTs reply to the famous criticisms of
@x. NJ. c. which recently appeared ia
xne& publication Mr. Reed explains very
fully his policy as speaker OF the house Of
representatives and his authority therefor
The following extracts from advanced
sheets gives a very general idea Of his ar
gument:
His idea Of Quorum
'sThe presence OF a majority OF the legis-
Eative body constitutes quorum to do
business The essence OF all business on
the part OF the legislative body Is the con-
sent Of quorum Of that body, either ex-
press or implied 1t may be as thoroughly
expressed by silence as by sound. In the
parliamentary sense, presence always inn
plies fun sight and hearing OF oil that
takes place. If member, then, Is present
in full sight and sound of all occurrences,
and sll action is loudly proclaimed by
clerk and speaker he is as much party
consenting to all that occurs as II he vocif-
Grated in his loudest tones. This all adj
init. Even the writer Of the anonymous
article admits this in all cases, except that
Of q yea and nay vote. Hence even with
him, we have only to deal with that method
OF determining the result.
Methods OF Consent.
'It must be obvious that all methods Of
determining the consent of the members
are OF equal value. BY each OF them laws
are passed which have equal validity
Whether the sense of the house is made
manifest by rnere volume of sound or by
the rising OF members in their places, by
members passing between tellers or by
yeaa and nays makes no difference what
ever in che result. Laws passed either way
have equal Toroe What then was the OBJ
aeet of the constitutional provision as TO
yeas and naysf Was II to establish new
aud separate doctrine OF quorum Was
Che quorum TO be q majority present when
All Other methods Of determining the ques-
zion weHe used over a majority voting when
keas and maya were calledf Was there TO
be one Quorum required IN one case and
another quorum In anotherf Does it re-
,9kiirc any different body 90 pass a bill by
Yhas and nays than by rising voter A
EAajorfty being present, can 100 members
ID one pass bill standing up, and not pass
I'D by yeas and naysY A claim like this
Utterly ignores the meaning of the call for
Heas and nays and the right 20 have TO-
which is given under the constitution.
The Object Of Yeas and Nays.
s'What were the yeas and nays given fori
Look at the debates on the adoption Of the
constitution and you will soc. It was tc
inform the people how their representa-
lives voted, II they voted at ALL and also
the fact that they did not vote, II such was
the case. The idea that In addition TO thll
she constitutional quorum was thereby in
stantly shifted from q majority present K
a majority acting is entirely q modern in
ventinn as illogical as IL Is unconstitu
tional
Sarcasm for TX. M. c.
'sThe evil TO be corrected by the new rule
Cd admitted by x M c.. He, therefore
A~oposss much higher remedy, as b.
@hinks. At the outset 1t should be born
a. mind that the remedy in use has dom
L. work. The house Of representatives b.
o. capable and sensible transaction o
Business has attracted the approval Of tn
whole country. The unknown writer say
that this should all be set aside and hi
remedy adopted, and the shades OF man,
eminent persons dead and living thereb
be placated.
ibid It ever occur to the reader what
singular dispensation Of Providence it i
whereby those who do not have the thing
of this world to do could have always don
them so much better than the poor Great
uree who did do themP Did you ever sec
sidewalk committee who could not build
aner house than the architect and the MAJ
ter woEkmsnf
10 Compel the Horse 20 Drink.
r'It really looks as if Providence ha
wasted its most oloying sweetness on Il
desert air. The new rule which the crit
suggests is that the speaker should tr
each member who refuses to vote not @
ceeding $50 and thereby compel the hor
to drink. This seems very strange, comir
as It does from a writer who has SO deep
respect for the letter Of the law that whC
khe constitution says the votes Of bol
houses shall be determined by the we
and nays he will be satisfied with no co
struction which shall not determine Il
quorum the same way"