The Portland daily press., 1890-01-30

n
| manly to prevent him from pleading his case
| to his fellow members and appealed to the
| Chair on his fairness as man and as
Speaker to give the Democrats an opportuni
ty to reply to the argument which the
Speaker had seen proper to make.
| Mr.. Butterworth Of Ohio, said: II hope
| the gentleman from Illinois Will Withdraw
his motion to Law on the table, This Is an
important question and the gentlemen on
| the other side have the right TO be heard.
| Loud applause on the Democratic slde.I
THE QUESTION OF PAIRS.
Mr. Payson thereupon withdrew his mo
tiOn. Mr.. Hatch of Missouri, rising to q
question of privilege, said the Speaker had
called his name as present, and declining to
| vote, when the record showed that for a
| week past he had had an honorable pair
| with a gentleman from Massachusetts,, Mr..
Rockwell, and had declined to vote on any
question. That showed the, fallaciousness
and unsoundness Of the Speakers decision.
The Speaker replied that the gentleman
from Missouri had the right to make any. de:
fence he saw fit; but the proprieties required
/ that 1t should also be said there was no rec
ognition in this body Of pairs, except by
| courtesy, and no one could know anything
| about them except the individuals con-
cerned In announcing that the gentleman
was present, the Chair made only state
| ment of fact. The reason the gentleman
| gave would exonerate him in the opinion Of
/ any gentleman If he felt 1t a question where
! y was necessary for him to say so.
| Mr.. Hatch replied tnat il was power be-
/ y0nd the Chair and beyond the majority to
| force him to br ak an honorable pair.
The Speaker replied that the matter was in
| process Of determination.
! Mr. Allen of Michigan, suggested that the
| gentleman's pair expressly excepted vote
| in which no quorum appeared.
Mr.. Crisp said the decision Of the Speaker
was an Overturniug OF the uninterr upted
practice of hundred years, and going d.
| rectly in the face of the arguments Of the
| distinguished Republicans who bad consid-
| cred that very question. This was the first
| time in the history OF the government that
the Speaker had decided he could 90 behind
the roll call provided for by the constitu-
tiOn. This was more than mere question
of.rules 1t was one OF constitutional right
The right to have the yeas and nays entered
on the Journal, necessarily followed when
the constitution said the yeas and nays
should be so entered. They could not be
position was to take from the constitution
the value 1t intended to possess. He
quoted from Speaker Blaine's ruling on
the force bill to the effect that the Speak
er had not the power to count quorum, and
declared that the decision lust made by
Speaker Reed would be the foundation of
the greatest legislative frauds ever commit
ted. The Republican members were now
invited by the Speaker to sustain him In
ruling which leading Republicans had stated
their names. The House was invited here,
Mr. Crisp said, to pursue course which Mr.
Blaine had declared Revolutionary. The reme-
dy Of the majority here was that which Mr..
Blaine had declared, on that occasion, to be
the remedy. That was, that the majority Of
the House could legislate. And so, today,
the Republicans of the House could legislate
by simply bringing in their men and Keep
ing quorum of men in the House. The
Democrats stood on their constitutional right
tn haVn the and anfpFa0 in tnR
Journal. When that right was exercised
there could be no appeal from what the jour-
nal said as to who were present and voting
by yeas and nays. lie quoted President
Garfield as denouncing similar rule when
proposed In his time, and asking the ques-
tions: "Who was to control the seeing of
the Speaker" and "How do we know but
that the Speaker may see forty members,
for his own purpose, more than there are in
the House?"
MR.. CULTIVATE ONE TOO MANY.
Mr.. Outhwaite declared he had been count
ed by the Speaker as present while he
the beginning Of the roll call, to the end Of
it.
At this time another great tumult and up
roar began, Mr.. Kerr and others desiring to
put questions to Mr.. Crisp. The Speaker
soon succeeded in restoring comparative or
| der, and Mr.. Crisp said Mr.. 0utwaite's state
ment showed the force and power OF Mr..
Gsyfslas ) ar egsss;; : ss;ss quass
discussion, that the Speakers count of the
| House under the existing rules could always
| be controlled by q, count by tellers. I'VE
have lived" said Mr.. Crisp, Through the
great civil war, when there was excitement
almost unparalleled in the history of parlia-
mentary action. During all those years no
man on this floor, and no party, ever before
thought 1t necessary to introduce a rule
which would give the power of declaring the
.nEv nNxnr hx~ rHw -
one person." [Applause on the Democratic
side.l In common with every member ON
his side he demanded that there should be a
public exhibition Of the question, public
record of the vote that it should be tellers,
if demanded; that it should be by yeas and
nays, If demanded, and that the yeas and
nays should determine how each member of
the House voted. He quoted Shakespeare's
line:
Like scurvy politician pretending to see
the things he does not"
Such politicians he said, might come here
on the other side and under the force OF
circumstances, and the impetuous passions
of members, declare that they saw what
they saw not, either with or without glass
eyes. Applause Mr.. Crisp quoted from
the remarks of Mr. Reed, the present
Speaker, in the same debate when he used
| these words "The constitutional idea of
quorum is not of the physical presence of
| majority of the members of the House but
| cipating in the business of the house"
| Triumphant cheers and clapplng Of hands
on the Democratic side and in the galleries.
II appeal" Mr.. Crisp exclaimed, from
"Philip drunk to Philip sober" Another
| outburst of applause.l
IN HIS BLANDEsT MANNER.
| The Speaker, in his blandest manner,
saey ee hs roR ase ba T2ee Sa S
be in order" lLaughter.] Order was. re-
| stored and it was asked from the Republican
side what had been the result of the de-
cision in New York referred to by the
Speaker. The question was answered by
Mr.. Springer to the effect that the action Of
Mr.. Hill on that occasion was denounced by
1 all the Democrats Of the New York legisla-
ture as revolutionary. This was greeted
with loud applause from the galleries, and
| general hand clapping OF Democratic men,
bers.
Mr.. Cannon said the constitution provided
that leach House shall be the judge Of the
election returns and qualification OF its own
members, and majority OF each House
shall constitute quorum to do business"
The constitution did not say the majority
should be required to vote for measure,
motion or resolution, in order to pass 1t. He
believed that good morals, good constitu-
tion, good law and good souled public COM
mon sense and decency, demanded that the
Speaker, when he announced the fact OF the
presence of over so members more than a
quorum and called their names, should de-
| clare the result of a vote. as adopted by a
| majority of the House.
Mr.. Carlisle of Kentucky, said: This
decision, strictly speaking, is not question
of parliamentary law in proper sense Of
the word. 1t Is question Of constitutional
law. Until this morning, no presiding OFF,
Ger in this House ever held it was competent
for less than quorum Of members elected
to this house, to pass any motion or bill. All
have held, from the beginning of Congress,
that majority must not only he present to
constitute quorum, but a quorum must
participate in legislation" Mr.. Carlisle
quoted the section of the constitution which
provides for the keeping Of journal and
entering upon 1t of the yeas and nays, when
demanded by fifth of the members present
also the section which states that less than
quorum eau adjourn from day to day and
compel the attendance of absent members.
The constitution, continued Mr.. Carlisle,
did not say in express terms, that, In order
to transact business, u majority Of the House
should be present, but that a maj JTity OF the
House should constitute quorum 20 do
business. Then II proceeded to specify dis
tinctly what these things were which a
minority could do. Ii the ruling made this
morning was correct, there vas no necessity
for any provision Of the constitution denn'
ing what less than a majority could do. Inc
majority constituted quorum 20 90 onsl-
ness" These ElrIs yfr u III TIE
constitution Of New fH.k Ip'n Which
| Tieutanant Cove a ulu's utclSlOn