The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1890-02-06
CARLISLE'S VERSION OF THE
TROUBLE.

Mr.. Carlisle as the leader OF the Oppo-
sition in the minority has prepared
for the Democrats their address to
the country, their reasons for act
ing as at present. After reciting
the history of the assembling of
congress on December and the APP
pointment of committee on rules,
and also pointing out that this COM
mittee on December 8 made such a
report as to allow the appointment OF
all other committees, this address
then proceeds as follows:
although nearly two months have
elapsed since the committee on rules
was appointed, it has made no report
upon matters offered except partial
one made on the 9th OF December,
and consequently the house has been
compelled to transact its business
without any rule or system, except the
general parliamentary law as con-
strued by the speaker. There has
been no calendar, no order of bust
ness, no fixed time to receive reports
| from committees, or for consideration
of bills or resolutions, and, in fact, no
regular methods whatever in the pro-
ceedings of the house. The Ameri-
can house of representa- 5es has been
during all this time, and still is, so far
as the rules for its government are
concerned, in precisely the same con-
dition as a popular meeting or a polit-
ical convention, in which the chair
man and his partisans absolutely con-
troll all proceedings. No measure can
get before the house for consideration
unless the speaker chooses to allow it
to be presented, and the members
have 10 means of knowing in advance
what they will be called upon to dis
cuss or decide.
"This is the first time in our history
that a legislative assemblage, or even
a public meeting, has attempted to
transact business for any considerable
period without regular code OF rules
prescribing the order of its proceed
ings, and the inconvenience and in
Justice resulting from such an attempt
have been forcibly illustrated in the
present instance. The speaker has
repeatedly, during the extraordinary
proceedings, refused to entertain par
liamentary motions that have been
recognized as legitimate ever since the
government was established, and when
attempts have been made to appeal
from his decisions he has refused to
submit the question to the house. By
his arbitrary rulings, sustained in some
instances by less than II quorum, he
has subverted nearly every principle
Of constitutional and parliamentary
law heretofore recognized in the house.
This personal and partisan domina-
ton OF the house was submitted to,
though not without repeated protests,
until we became convinced that it was
the deliberate purpose of the speaker
and his supporters to proceed without
rules to GUST Democratic members
whose seats are contested and admit
their Republican opponents whether
elected or not"
Then follows q recital of the recent
skirmishing in the house with which
all are familiar. The address then
proceeds:
"The constitution of the United
States provides thata majority of each
house shall constitute Il quorum to do
business, but smaller number may
adjourn from day to day and may be
authorized to compel the attendance
of absentees in such manner and under
such penalties as each house may pro-
vide. Another clause of the constitu-
ton requires each house to keep a
journal of its proceedings, and pro
vides that when one-iifth OF the men,
bers present desire it the yeas and
nays shall be taken on any question
and entered on the journal. Since
the beginning of the government
under the constitution more than a
hundred years ago the house of repre-
sentatives and the senate have uni
formly construed the first clause OF
the constitution quoted above to mean
that a majority of all the members
elect must be present actually partici-
pate in the transaction of business,
and that whenever, upon the call OF
the yeas and nays, it appears from the
journal, which is the only official
record, that constitutional quorum
has not voted on any proposition, the
vote was q nullity and no further bust
ness could be done until the requisite
number appeared and voted on the
call of the yeas and nays. No matter
how many might he actually present,
it was the speakers duty to take
notice of the fact and declare that the
pending bill or motion had not passed.
Speaker Reed himself, when in the
minority on the floor of the house,
stated the true meaning and true
philosophy of the constitution when
he said: The constitutional idea
of n quorum is not the presence OF
a majority of members of the house,
but a majority OF the members present
and participating in the business of the
hOuse H. il not their visible prps-