Los Angeles daily herald., 1890-01-31
DELIVERED BY CARRIERS
Al 2Oc. per Week. or soc. per Month
A Revolutionary Ruling.

of Congress have at last shown their
hands. With very small margin of
majority on the floor, they have had it in
view to greatly increase their strength
by seating a number of Republicans who
are contesting the places of Democrats.
But under the rules as they have been
interpreted from the beginning by the
Speakers of the House, it is not so easy
q matter to unseat members, unless the
dominant party has very strong work.
ing majority. In the days of Recon
struction, when the Republican party
was overwhelmingly in the ascendant in
both Houses, Democratic member was
unseated if the slightest pretext could be
found for doing so. 1t was only neces-
sary for Republican to file semi
plausible contest to obtain the Demo
Gratis seat. But since the Democracy
have become formidable, they have been
enabled by the rules of the House to
interpose an estopper upon the easy
methods of their antagonists.
There is a marked contrast between
the policy pursued by the Democrats
when in possession of majority of the
House and the tactics of the Republicans
when in power. It was almost q safe
bet in the former case that in a contest
for seat the Democrat would be cast,
no matter how just or how strong his
claims. In trying to avoid the imputa-
tion of using their power for party
advantage, the Democrats went to
the other extreme, and committed
acts of gross injustice against
the constituencies that had honestly
elected Democratic representatives.
These facts are too notorious to
require the citation of special instances.
But there is no sentimental nonsense
about the Republicans. When they can
gain party advantage they 60 for it, no
matter at what cost of morality or pre-
cedent.
The latest move is that developed in
the ruling of Speaker Reed on Wednes-
day. On the call of contested election
case, the question of consideration was
raised, and on the roll-call the vote stood
161 yeas, nays. This showed that the
requisite quorum for passing bill was
not present, and according to all prece-
dent, and to parliamentary usage from
the beginning, the measure would have
to 60 over. But at this point Speaker
Reed sprung his little mine. He had
kept tally of the Democratic names as
they we're called, and satisfying himself
that they we're present and refrained from
voting, he made the unprecedented and
revolutionary ruling that there being
quorum present, counting the members
who refused to vote, the motion could be
voted upon and passed by minority.
Apart from the fact that to paes q
measure without quorum voting, which
would really mean to treat the minority
as an immaterial portion of the body, g
ruling of this arbitrary and revolutionary
character places very dangerous power
in the hands of the Speaker. 1t leaves
him to determine the essential fact that
there is a quorum ia the House upon his
own unquestioned and unqnestionable
declaration. He may be mistaken, and
yet there is no way in which he can be
corrected. An instance in point occurred
at the very time he made the ruling
one Democrat whom he had noted as be-
ing in his seat declared to the House
that he was not there when the roll was
called. Now if the Speaker could be
mistaken in one person he might in
others, and these mistakes might be
enough at any time to create quorum
present when there was actually no quo
rum. This power enables the Speaker
to make the journal, and, as Mr.. Carlisle
truly said, if one man can do that he can
pass bill as easily as a majority OF the
House.
If the new rule is going to be enforced,
then there should be some safer means
of arriving at the fact that there is a
quorum present than the mere guess
count of the Speaker. There should be
tellers appointed to take note of each
name answered to and voting and the
presence of those refusing to vote when
their names are called. The report OF
these tellers would 60 regularly on the
journal; but to leave this important
question to the sole and fallible determi-
nation of the Speaker would render leg
islation liable to the grossest and most
dangerous abuses.
1t is hardly worth while for the Re-
publicans, for temporary party advan-
tage, to resort to 30 dangerous and revo-
lutionary change in parliamentary con-
struction. Whilst they may add few
votes TO their present majority and
strengthen themselves to pass party
measures that will be strenuously op.
posed by the Democrats, yet having es-
tablished this bad precedent it may
come home, like Arab chickens, to roost
with them when the Democracy again
come into power, as they are sure to do
at the next election. This is double
edged sword which it will not pay in the
long run to fool with and the Republicans
will find it out before they are much
older.
WE DOUBT whether there ever has been
witnessed 80 admirable an exhibition of
good nature in playhouse audience as