New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1890-05-19
an INSULT CALLING FOR REBUKE.

Mr.. Bynum, who had previously earned an
unenviable reputation for behavior and Ian
guage unbeftting a company of gentlemen,
went to such extremes on Saturday that the
House publicly censured him. Then he de-
clared that he regarded the censure of the
House as an honor, and the Democratic mem
beS of the House supported, encouraged and
wildly applauded him. What is the duty of
the House in these circumstances?
1t is no longer a question whether Mr.
Bynum had been wronged, or could plead any
provocation in excuse But as matter OF
fact he had been so far lost to the obligations
and prophecies of his place that he had Z" an
swered" certain evidence regarding question
of duties, given by worthy citizen of Pitts
burg. not by adducing other evidence, but by
publicly declaring that gentleman liar and
perjurer. To such a cowardly attack made
when he could not respond the citizen OF Pitts
burg answered by the letter which was read by
his representative in Congress. Thereupon Mr.
Bynum proceeded to use language which meant
nothing if it did not mean that the representa-
tive, Mr. Bayne, was also liar and perjWer
because he had read the letter of his con-
stituent 1t will appear to every dispassionate
reader that Mr.. Bynums indecent assault upon
an absent citizen, who had in no way injured
the Indiana member, but had given testimony
not pleasing to Free Traders, was the respon-
sble cause of the whole disgraceful scene.
But the question changed it's character en-
tirely. when Mr.. Bynum insulted the House
and was sustained by his party friends in his
insult. What now remains to be determined
is, whether the House of Representatives has
power to preserve order in its own proceedings
Mr.. Bynums violence and abuse had wasted the
time of the House for the greater part OF
day, and when called to order he had refused TO
make any apology. His friends supported him
in riotous and turbulent behavior, and when
called to order by the Speaker and directed to
be seated they refused The official censure
administered by vote Of the House Mr.
Bynum's friends sustained him in meeting
with insult. If the House of Representatives
cannot so deal with such behavior that men
will hesitate to repeat it, it may well be
doubted whether that body can preserve its
power to transact public business at all. With
out order obedience of its rules and respect for
its authority, a deliberative body cannot con-
tinue to perform its functions.
There is no partisan object to be served by
sending Mr. Bynum back to his constituents
The district is Democratic. Indiana Democrats
boastfully uphold leaders who have been con-
victed of crimes committed for the sake of that
party. 1t may be expected that they would
glorify Mr.. Bynum as a champion, and elect
him again. The expenses would fall, not upon
the man or the party responsible, but upon
taxpayers of whom a large portion are in no
way blameworthy. Nevertheless it is ques-
ton not to be lightly set aside or answered
whether the House can afford to refrain any
longer from making an example of those who
have insulted it, broken its rules and disre-
garded its authority. In England the fear of
temporary suspension from participation in
the proceedings of Parliament has some re-
straining influence Here the necessary remedy
has not yet been applied. But there would be
less waste of time in disgusting personalities
if it should become the established law of the
House that violation of its rules, or the use of
insulting and supplementary language should
be Immediately followed by expulsion.