The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1890-02-04
Mr.. Reed States His Side.

WASHINGTON, Feb. 2.-Speaker Reed to
day made to representative of the Asso-
ciated Press the following statement con-
corning the Republican position in the
present great controversy: ''Mr Carlisle
was entirely right when he said. in sub
stance, that the decision of the House that
quorum was constituted to do business
when a majority of the House was present
would change from its foundation the
method of doing business. 1t certainly will
do so, for it will enable the majority elected
by the people to rule by their own votes
and not by the su1ferance of the minority.
The rule of the majority is at the very base
of our government.
and we are yet in our sins. Look at prac-
tlcal working of the other doctrine. The
Republicans have majority of seven, but
they have only three over quorum;
16S is our number, 165 is to
be at all times sick or incapacitated. These
may get well, but others fall sick in their
turn. There has been one quorum. Ac-
cordingly, CarliSe's idea has gone entirely
to pieces, though even after all fraud shall
be deducted the people had found for the
Republicans by seven majority. All this
time while we are keeping the House other
men hardly less sick, lao. Is it possible
that the United States is paying these gen
tlemen Sl3 a day without even the poor
privilege of counting their silent forms.
Mr.. Carlisle says there is no precedent for
the decision of the House. have person
ally seen and heard him furnish a hundred.
Many times [ have heard him declare
that the number for and against
such bill was, say, so for and 20s against,
matthew al icalU less than ouOrI1m
declare bill passed and then sign the bill,
thereby certifying under the most solemn
sanction of his oath of office that the bill
had properly and constitutionally passed
the House. How could he have done this
if his count should be true that quorum
must vote! Understand me, day after day
Carlisle in my presence has declared such
bills had votes for and against by
his own count, as speaker, less than
declared it passed and has signed it, thus
furnishing the only proof the President
could have that it had passed. How could
this be except on the plain ground that if
quorum did not vote the presence of a
quorum was enough? But this matter
does not need argument. In Carlisle's own
state, in Democratic Tennessee, in Dem
cratic New York, in Democratic Ohio, in
Massachusetts and in the courts every
WuSIo, DIS y Ou uldy SCI ny ouGGcIWOfGu >
speech, the decision just upheld by the
House is the law of the land and it ought to
be, if good government is not to perish from
the face of the earth. Not ruling
has been made in the House to suppress
flibustering, which has not had the full
sanction of parliamentary law. That men
should resist only shows how ingrained
wrong course has become and how neces-
sary the remedy.
What is the House trying to do? Why,
to perform its highest functions-that of
deciding the right of member to his seat
Until 1882 no man ever dared to
tlllbuster against such case. No
man ought to be allowed to do
it today, yet every day three hours
are wasted in proving the journal when
five minutes would be ample. These three
hours belong to public business. People do
not understand that every roll call con
sumes three quarters of an hour. When
we first came here the obstructionists de-
clared they would die in the last ditch
against my rules if they did not approve of
them, now they are fighting at theory in
defense of the liberties of their country be-
cause we don't force the rules on them. If
there could be fewer deaths at theory and
more business in the House, the country
would be better off 1t is true the Demo
cratic leaders, like Mr.. Carlisle, have long
since ceased to participate in defiance of
good government, but they should now
make themselves heard affirma lively on the
side Of order.''