New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1890-01-31
DENOUNCING THE SPEAKER,
Continued from First PAGE.


suspended until order restored. Several members
did not understand the question
The Speaker replied that he had carefully stated the
question, and II it had not been heard it owing to
the confusion made by the very gentlemen who were
now complaining that they did not know what the
question was. The Speaker then re-stated the Ques-
ton, and the vote resulted yeas 1852; nays, l. The
Speaker declared the motion carried and directed the
clerk to enter on the journal the names Of twenty
| members present but not voting.
THE IRREPREssIBLE SPRINGER.
| Mr. Springer raised the point OF quorum, but
the Speaker declined to recognize him, and instead
recognized Mr.. Mckinley Of Ohio, to discuss the APP
peal taken from the decision Of the Speaker yesterday
Mr.. Mckinley attempted to proceed, but Mr. Springer
continued TO address the Chair.
He insisted upon his right TO be heard, declaring,
amid much noise and confusion, that the Speaker must
recognize him when rising point Of order that no
quorum had voted.
The Speaker replied that that the question
about TO be ascertaned.
Mr. springer-I raise the point Of order that 1t re
qulres quorum TO appove the Journal
The Speaker-The gentleman from Ohio viii pro-
coed.
Mr.. springer-Does the Speaker refuse to entertain
question Of order in this House
The Speaker-The gentleman from Ohio will proceed
Mr. Sprngcr-I rise to a question of order.
The Speaker-The gentleman from Ohio has the floor
Mr. Sprlngef-BuJ rise 10 queSllOh vi o'uSi'
which, II good, will take the gentleman of the floor
The speaker-The gentleman from Illinois VIII be
kind enough to take his seat.
Mr. Springer-There are rules requiring He 10
take my seat can stand up If desire. can stand
up and assert my constitutional rights against an
arbitrary ruling Of the Speaker: and in the name OF
my constituents protest against it.
Mr. Mckinley again attempted to proceed but
Slr. Springer held his ground, and by his pertinacty
finally secured recognition. lie then proceeded TO
argue that even though the journal had been ap-
proved, it IN order for him TO move 10 correct
1t, and he therefore moved to correct 1t by striking
out the list of members present and not voting. The
Speaker stated that that question Of recogn
tion and that he had already recognized the gentle
man from Ohio.
MR. McKINLEY'S CONVINCING ARGUMENT.
Mr. Mckinley then proceeded with his argument
This question, he said. was made most important in
every aspect not only to the majority, but TO the
minority. 1t was of sufficient Importance to demand
members to pause and consider it. unmOved by pas
sion and unbiased by prejudice 1t was the gentle
man from Kentucky Cir. Carlisle) had said con-
stuonal rather than parliamentary question. All
that was involved in the appeal was simply question
of fact Was not the Speakers count correct
Did any gentleman whose name was disclosed by the
count rise in his place and declare that he was not
present. Not one The Constitution did not declare
that a majority Of the members who an
swered TO their constitute quorum
That left to the House. and the House left 1t TO
the Speaker Under general parliamentary law, the
Speaker had the right to count the members and IL
there no quorum, to stop all business The prn-
cple distinctly established that the presiding Off
Ger might count. and it his duty to count the
number OF members who might be present to constitute
a quorum.
Mr. Carlisle had declared that under the Speakers
decision, Representative could pass bill with 167
members sitting in their seats in silence So he could,
and he ought to- If 1877 members sat in silence and
refused to vote, when their votes would defeat the
proposition then the vote of single member ought to
pass a bill. And this was done over and over again
in every week Of every session Of Congress that had
been held in the last century.
Mr.. Carlisle suggested that the Constitution provided
that when the President vetoed measure it should
not become law unless repassed by vote Of two
thirds. Did the gentleman hold that one man could
pass bill the Presidents veto7
Mr.. Mckinley replied that he not discussing the
question to what the House could do on bill sent
back by the President That was a constitutional
provision
Mr.. Carlisle said that bigger quorum required
then than when any other measure was before the
House.
Mr.. McKlnley-Thc gentleman will recall that under
that very provision OF the Constitution yea and nay
vote was required. 1t is not required the passage
of other bills. Applause on Republican side)
Continuing, Mr.. Mckinley said that Mr.. Carlisle. as
Speaker, had repeatedly signed bills and resolutions
which had never received the constitutional majority.
lie had done II over and over again The action OF
the Democrats yesterday had never been dreamed OF
by the fathers of the Constitution. lie not say
ing that the Democrats doing differently from
what the Republican party had done for years. lie
himself had stood here and flibusered day after day
in silence. refusing TO vote, but he could not now
recall that he had ever done it from a high, or
noble, worthy purpose (applausel; and there had
never been time that he could remember that he had
not felt ashamed Of himself. (Applause) Not only
had that been his feeling in the past but if gentle
men would be honest with themselves and with each
other they would remember how commonly flibuS
toring had been carried on on account Of personal
plquc.
THE TYRANNY OF THE MINORITY.
II gentlemen on the other side were going TO have
revolution, let them have it in the proper way, and
get ont of the House. applause on Republican
sldeJ They had no business to turn upon the Re
publlcans who here and ready to do business,
and call them revoutlonsts. The gentlemen on the
other side wanted to perpetuate fiction which de-
clared that, although members were present In their
seats they should be held to be cOnStructve absent
The Republicans cOntendng that this should
be fact and truth, and not fiction, and tnat mem
bers who sat in their seats should be counted as
present because they were present Applause on
Republican side.D The Democrats wanted the journal
to declare a lie: the Republicans wanted the journal
to declare the truth. (Applause.l II was about
time to stop this legal fiction. This controversy was
10 determine whether majority should rule and
govern or be subject to the tyranny of a minority
Talk about the tyranny of MAJORITY The tyranny
of the minority infinitely more odious.
Mr.. Turner, of Georgia, said that the pending ques-
ton was the most important that had ever arisen as
TO the mode Of procedure in this House. lie believed
that if the wild presented here once engrafted
on the practice OF the House, it would inaugtate
reign of anarchy and prohgacy unprecedented in the
annals OF the country 1t therefore, an important
question. which men should discuss men who sat