Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1890-08-05

Without doubt the most widely read
and generally commented upon article in
the North American Review for July. was
that entitled The Speakers Error by
IA eN-M. c.; and an article equally as
notable aud which will command a. eiose
Il reading Is a reply to that article in the
August number of the Review from the
pen Of Speaker Reed himself. The
writer Of the first article claimed that
Speaker Reeds error was in ruling in
the House of Rrprcs entatives, that menu
bers present and refu sing to vote shall
be counted in order to make up a quo
rum. The writer in the July Review
argued that this ruling was unconstitu-
tioual, but ut the same time he had the
honesty TO deplore the existence of the
old rule IA a reprehensible one, and one
which ought to be stopped Upon this
point both Mr.. Reed and his anonymous
critic were agreed; and on the part of
the Speaker he assumed the response
billty of putting sop to the practice
by rendering the silence of MEM
bcrs who were present value
less He did this by counting those
actually present in making up a1uorun,
and leaving the decision to the majority
of those voting however small the num-
her, This is just the point which "N.
NJ. C." insists ia wrong !, and he said it
was the Speakers duty to enforce the
rule which requires each member to vote
on each question. Hence he insisted that
the only change in the rules that was
demanded was a change which would
have given the Speaker power to impose
the $50 fine upon all members not voting
on a yea and nay call. But Speaker Reed
In his reply shows clearly that what
the House wanted was not revenue
from it's members refusing to vote, but
members who would vote aud thus ny
doing their duty aid in dispatching the
business of the House. Moreover, MIR
Reed shows that the House has no con.
stitutionsl power to delegate to its pre-
siding officer the punishment of its
members
Speaker Reed shows that under the
quorum-c counting rule, the business of
the House is carried forward, whereas
under the oil rule it was retarded
aud stopped. The new quorum
counting rule must &c said to
be great success in practi-
cal legislation, and there can be no
ton, after all the ranking personalities
have subsidized, will unite in pronounci1g
1, great success, aud mastery stroke
of Parliamentary practice.
Mr.. Reeds article in the August
I North American is one which presents q
notable illustration of the correct forms
of Parliamentary practice. and which
ably maintains the legality of his rul-
ings. In this the speaker does not
stand alone. The Supreme Courts of
our own State aud of New Hampshire
have each decided that where
a quorum is present majority of those
vot ny, even though they are less than
half the body, are sufficient to carry a
measure. This is the present RUE of the
| House of Representatives. Some of the
most important acts of the present ses-
sion haze been adopted by such vote.
one Of them being so important mat
| ter as the admission of State into the
Union. These several articles canno,
be regarded "a at all sensational or. on
the part of the editor Of the Review,
contributing 10 useless eoatroyersary
| Of the hour. The issue involved is mo-
mensous. embracing as it does the
/ power of the msjority of the House
to conduct Its business. So important a
lquestion is sufficient to absorb the atten-
ton OF the Intelligent men of the country,
I even il it has been discussed in i less
able and interesting manner 1t
Is impossible to present the full force
of Speaker Reeds article, AS it cannot well
! he condensed. aud must be read In full il
: one would obtain proper understand
! Ing of the force of logic aud sarcasm
with which he retorts upon his anony.
, nous critic. 1t is not likely that the
Federal Supreme Court will be called up.
on 10 decide upon tue conssisutienality 0!
J the Speakers rulings and decisions. Such
: being the case his position seems anim.
peachable.