The tribune. [volume] (Great Falls, Mont.) 1890-1890, 1890-02-08
GREAT FALLS B
SATURDAY. FEBRUARY 8. 1890.
SEMI-WEEKLY
REEDS RULING.

The address which ex-Speaker Carlisle
and the democratic members of the house
have published should be read by all wht
desire to know clearly and fairly the state
of things at Washington. The origin Of
the present conflict is thus outlined:
"Although nearly two months have
elapsed since the committee on rules was
appointed, it has made no report, except
a partial one made tn the 9Th of Decem.
Der, and consequently the house has beer
compelled to conduct its business without
any rule or system except general parlia.
mentary law, as construed by the speaker
The American house of representatives
has been during all this time, and still is
so far as rules for its government are
concerned, in precisely the same condi
ton as a popular meeting or a political
convention, in which the chairman and
his partisans absolutely control all pro.
ceedings."
All who know the wide powers which
the chairman OF a public meeting can ex
ercise will understand what this means
and how untitled such vague rules are
for congressional proceedings.
Nv Sloul S'ulu ECU Uc-
fore the house for consideration unless
Autocrat Reed choose to allow it to be
presented and no one knew in advance
what question may be sprung on the
members, the democrats waited patiently
for over two months. The purpose of the
republican hardness at last became clear.
The address says:
"Thls personal and partisan domination
of the house was submitted to, though
not without repeated protest, until we be-
came convinced that it was the deliberate
purpose of the speaker and his supporters
to proceed without rules to GUST demo.
cratic members whose seats are contested
and to admit their republican opponents.
"When on January 25th the committee
on elections called up the contested cleo
ton case the democratic members deter
mined that in the absence of rules it
should not be considered if they could
prevent it by any proper parliamentary
proceedings. Accordingly they raised the
question OF consideration, demanding the
yeas and nays, and on a call of the roll
refralned from voting. The result was
that less than a constitutional quorum
voted, but the speaker, in violation of the
uniform practice of the house for more
than a century, proceeded to count the
members who were present, but not vot-
ing, and declared that the house decided
to take the case up
"As soon as this decision was made an
appeal was taken, and on the motion to
lay the appeal on the table the yeas and
nays were taken and less than a quorum
voted. But the speaker again counted
the members not voting and decided the
motion agreed to and his ruling thereby
sustained"
The conflict since January 25 has been
a repetition of the resistance here out
lined. On the motion to seat the West
Virginia claimant, the republicans had
for the first time a bare quorum.
The democrats repudiate the charge
that the minority wants to govern. On
the contrary, they explicitly call on the
republican majority to attend to business
and assume full responsibility for its acts.
Finally, the address quotes Reeds own
words, which were as follows:
'The constitutional idea of a quorum is
moi the presence of a majority of all the
members of the house, but a majority of
the members present and participating in
the business of the house. 1t is not their
physical presence, but their Judgment
and votes which the constitution calls
for"
In the face of this statement, which is
in accord with opinions expressed by
Blaine, Garfield, Conger and other repub-
%licans, the "organs" are %denuuucing
the democrats for defending the consti-
tuti0n