The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1890-02-18
THE DEMOCRATS WERE VERY HAPPY
They Thought They Had Found a
Fine Chance to FiIibuster,
But the Speaker Was Too Sharp ana
Spoiled Their Scheme.
A Lively Debate With Short Speech
by the Presiding officer.


Democrats made their first attempt to OBJ.
struct, under the new rules. They chose a
favorable moment, and made the attacl
with great skill and cunning. They thought
they had discovered vulnerable point and
could block legislation. 1t was On suspen
sion, when on motion. seconded by ma
lority determined by tellers, the rules could
be suspended for the passage of certain
bills. The only provision for counting thos'
who second the motion is by tellers. Tht
Democrats saw that the tellers could. of ne
cessity, take account only of such members
as passed between them. If less than quo
rum passed for the count they reasoned tina
there was no possible way of establishing
the presence of quorum. When the tellers
returned the count today, they reported ia
for secopding and against. and less than 8
quorum had voted. The Democrats at oncs
raised the point of no quorum, but Mr.. Reet
bad anticipated their scheme, and while they
had been planning he had been counting the
members, and had found 172, or more than q
quorum, present. This fact he announced
Then the Democrats argued the point fol-
half an hour, the Republican members reply
ing. At the end of the arguments, Mr.
Reed made his ruling as follows:
Perhaps a very proper construction
might be that those who passed between th'
tellers are alone to be considered in the de.
termination of the question of second, il
being immaterial whether or not quorum
expressed an opinion or were present, were
it not for the fact that quorum must be
present at all times in order to transact bust
ness. Therefore, the question before the
House is question very much like that
which has been passed upon al
ready, and repeatedly, by the House Of
representatives. Under the constitution oi
the United States it is necessary that 9
quorum OF a majority of the members shall
be present in order to transact the public
business. Whether it is necessary for then
to act or not is the point in dispute. Since
that question has come up in the House the
matter has been discussed from one end oi
the country to the other, resulting in a dis
play of precedents and in judgments of the
courts which can leave no doubt in the mind
of any one who has examined them. The
courts of very many of the states and the
legislatures of very many of the states
have taken that course in regard to the mat
ter so far as the principle and practice are
concerned, which has been endorsed by the
therefore, in this House at least.
consider the question settled that
II majority are present to do business,
their presence is all that is required in order
to make quorum. If they decline to vote
their inaction cannot be in the pathway of
the action of those who do their duty. The
idea that silence can be stronger than neg
ative vote seems to have been unknown to
our ancestors. 1t seems to be modern par
liamentary fiction which has never been able
to stand the examination of courts where
business questions were decided. l have yet
to see single declaration of a court against
the position which has lately been taken by
the House of Representatives.
"The only question then remains is one of
detail; by what method shall the presence of
the quorum be ascertained? l think an ex.
of all the books of parliamentary
has been the custom from time
for the presiding officer to de-
termine in such manner as he deems accu-
rate and suitable the presence OF a quorum
The rules of this House contain nothing
derogatory to that power, for it is power in
his hands. 1t is more by the performance of
his duty. He can do it by count which sat-
isfies him, or if it is seriously questioned. as
it has not been in this case, the fact can be
ascertained by other methods. In truth, in
tives, the determination of a vote was made
even by tellers differently from what it is
now, there being two tellers to take the af-
firmative and two other tellers to take the
negative votes If it be suggested that evil
ss likely ar 70 foley r0% The any pesan wSo
counts, the answer is very simple; it is that
whenever an officer is intrusted with the
duty of taking count, whether of vote or
of the presence of quorum. it is liable to
the same objection which is Inherent in all
human, affairs which always proceed
formance by publici officers of their public
duties. Moreover, in the House of Repre-
sentatives a correction of any material mis-
take Is made very readily and very simple,
because If any number of members equal to
or exceeding one fifth have doubt in regard
to the business, they have the right to de-
nand the yeas and nays on the passage of
the bill or upon the questions arising.
Under these circumstances, 1t seems that
their can no evil follow from the
practise of members who. are present
to record themselves against a
measure they have full opportunity to do so.
In this case theChair had repeatedly counted
the House during the vote and after the vote
was taken ard before it was announced,
and, therefore, being satisfied that consti-
tutional quorum was present to do business
the chair announces that the yeas are ia and
the nays aud that the motion has been
seconded"
This settled it. The Democrats made no
appeal. They did not even utter word.
They were completely foiled and abandoned
silently and hopelessly their first formidable
attack under the new rules. This is not
probably their last attempt at resistance but
it is very doubtful if they again attempt to
do 1t by assailiDg the Speakers position. 1t
is plain to see that they realize that he car
ries too many guns for them all.