New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1890-02-13

APPROPRiA TONS IND MINORITY HCLE'
The only argument that is even remotely re-
lated TO the public interest which Democrats
have to offer against the adoption OF the new
rules is that they would permit eXtravagant
APPROXIMATIONS 1t is said indeed, that these
rules would deprive the minority of its rights
But that is purely personal matter unless II
can be shown that the deprivation would affect
some public interest. Republican Congress
men are not called upon, for the sake OF a
minority which has never been either Just or
decent when il was in control OF lcglSailQn' 10
refrain from any step which II may judge that
the public welfare requires. But ii Is pretend
ed hy the Democrats that the minority III the
House. if enabled to stop legislation at its pleas
urc. will prevent the waSteful or corrupt APP
propratiou of public moneys.
Il j, enough to say that the power OF the
minority in the House has never been used Tor
such 4 purpose The only measure which
Democrats i'm the House have ever opposed by
flibu>tcring, on the ground that il would take
money from the Treasury which ought not to
he taken. was the Direct Tax bill, which would
have refunded to the states the sum collected
during the Civil War hy direct taxation. No
man has ever pretended or can with reason
claim that the moderate sum which 1t was pro-
posed to appropriate would not have been moro
useful if employed in the support of the Nchoo'
system in the different state; than lt'ha> becn
as part of an idle and miSchcyouS surplus III
the National Treasury. The ground of Demo
cratic objection to this measure was not tina; II
was Wastcful, not that 1t was an appropriation
for the benefit of individuals not that II was III
any sense corrupt. The objection was simply
a sectional one; the States in rebellion had no'
paid any part of the money, and therefore
would not share the money refunded For
this pi,iiul reason, and for no other, sunday
Democrats flbustorcd against this measure.
The Democratic members of the House may
safely be challenged 70 mention any other ap-
preparation that can by any one Doe called cN.
trayaeant iniquitouS. or merely nwi~e. which
has been stopped by m" methods now defend
ed According 20 Democratic assertions. Do
thousands OF cases such appropriations haN"
been made by the Republican, when ln conuo.
of the House Why is It that these improper
or unwiSe appropriations were never prevented
BY a Democratic minority? The Republicans
know that MAN. unwiSe and cXtrayagan' APP
propriatious have been made by Democrats
when in control Of the House. Bur they are
compelled 10 admit a> leading Republican
members have admitted on the floor, that the
power of fibustcring has not been employed
by them for purposes which they can now ro-
gard with satisfaction. II cannot Dec claimed
that either party has ever reSortcd 10 iiiihu,'"r-
ing 70 stop unwi>e or improper appropriations.
That weapon is not one that is ever drawn or
used for the public interest. J., is a mean, of
partisan Defence and has been employed all
most exclusively in partisan resistance 10 meas.
ucS proposed by the majority and Us The ma
iority considered To be for the public good.
In host Of instance, this power might have
been used by a minority with some excuse.
Why did not the Democratic minority iilbu>'cr
for example. in order 20 defeat that Wa>'otu.
River and Iarbor bill some years ago, which
caused the speedy transfer of power n Tire
House from Republican 10 Democratic hands %
Why has that minority never attempted 10 pre-
vent by hlihuStcring any Of the measures
which, in subsequent campaigns II has de-
/ nOunccd as corrupt or cXtravagant?
II is utterly absurd to suppose that minority
is 10 be more trusted. is less likely 20 vote
away public money was'cfully or mvscly
! than a majority. Corrupt measures always
enlist the support Of some men Of both parties.
The unwiSe or wastehl measures Away, 500
cure more or less support on both sides Of tho
| House The hungry jobhers, who strive 10
/ enrich themselves by getting money out of the
/ public Treasury, are always Of both parties.
! But there is not the slightest reason for be-
! ievng that the people usually elect the corrupt
| or unwise candidates. rather than those who
regard the public interest. II is contrary 10
the theory Of republican institutions 70 sup
pose that a minority deserves confidence rather
/ than majority.
] 4 1Nn DLCHIT