Los Angeles daily herald., 1890-02-01

elected, and put in men who not only
were not elected, but who do not com
mand the respect of the constituents they
seek here to represent. Now proceed IL
this manner, but in the language OF the
immortal Emmett, we propose ito dis
pute every inch of ground, burn every
bunch OF grass, and the last entrench'
ment OF liberty shall be our grave"
The Democratic side burst into cheers,
answered by derisive laughter by the
Republicans.
The Speaker stood calm and collected
and above the roar was heard Springer e
voice for adjournment. Partial order
being restored, the Speaker ruled that
the motion was not in order, and made a
brief statement: "The House will not
allow ITSELF" said the Speaker, "to be
deceived by epithets. Whatever has
been done here has been done in the
face of the world, and is subject to it's
discriminating judgment. The proceed
ings OF this House, so far as the chair is
concerned, have been orderly Democratic
hisses), suitable and in conformity with
the rules of parliamentary law (renewed
hisses); and the refusal of the chair to
entertain a motion to adjourn at this
luncture is strictly in accordance there
with Democratic groans). There is
no possibility by which orderly methods
OF parliamentary procedure can be used
to stop legislation; hence when any
members or set of members undertake to
oppose the orderly progress of business,
even by the use Of ordinarily recognized
parliamentary motions, it is the right of
the majority to refuse to have those mo-
tions entertained, and cause public busi-
ness to proceed. Primarily, the organ of
the House is the man elected to the
Speakership. 1t is his duty in clear case,
recognizing the situation, to endeavor to
carry out the wishes and desires of the
majority of the body he represents.
Whenever it becomes apparent that ordi-
nary proper parliamentary motions are
being used solely FOR the purpose of delay
and obstruction, when members draw
over an unprecedented correcting
himself) draw over rule (applause and
laughter on the Democratic side) in re-
gard to the reading of the journal-when
gentleman steps down to the front,
amid the applause of his associates,
and announces that he intends to
make opposition in every direction,
lit becomes apparent to the House and
the community what his purpose is. 1t
is then the duty of the Speaker to take
under parliamentary law the proper
course in regard to such matters, and in
order that there may not be any misun-
derstanding as to whether or not it is the
wish and desire of the majority of the
House, the question of appeal from the
refusal of the chair to entertain the mo-
ton will be presented to the House."
Springer desired to be heard on appeal,
but the Speaker recognized Mckinley,
who moved to lay the appeal on the
table. In vain did Springer protest,
the Speaker merely remarking the
House would now vote on the question
whether it desired to hear the gentleman
from Illinois.
The Speaker directed the call of the
roll, but the voice of the clerk WAS
drowned by that of Springer, who, as
we'll as could be heard in the confusion,
said he had never known a time in the
history of the country.when an appeal
was refused debate. He denied the
right of the Speaker or the House to gag
msmb bers in this manner.
The appeal was then laid on the table
yeas 1872, nays none, the Speaker, as
usual, counting the requisite number to
make quorum.
Springer moved 10 adjourn, but the
Speaker said the decision of the chair
had been sustained by the House, and
refused to entertain the motion.
The Speaker thereupon recognized
Dalzell, of Pennsylvania, to speak upon
the Smith-Jackson election case.
Crisp raised the question OF considera-
ton, and the Speaker replied that the
House had already decided to consider
the election case. Notwithstanding
Crisp's protest that the question of coE.
sideyation decided the previous day was
not binding today, the Speaker refused to
put the question to the House.
Crisp appealed but the Speaker de-
clined to entertain the appeal, amid
Dem ocratic Kisses. Crisp asked for
reasons and the Speaker gave the vote
of the House, sustaining the rulings of
the chair against dilatory motions.
Crisp protested that the Speaker had
no right 10 determine his motives, to
which the Speaker replied that he
thought them perfectly apparent.
Dalzell said Crisp was out of order.
Crisp replied: 81 have a right to
present this proposition to the Speaker
and the country, 80 that it may be under
stood that you are pursuing further that
course ysu seem to have entered on, OF
disregarding all customs, practices and
parliamentary rules"
Dalzsll then proceeded to speak, but
the uproar continued until Crisp advised
his colleagues that they should give the
election case quiet hearing, 80 that they
might pass upon it intelligently. This
advice was acted upon, and at the con-
clusion of Dalzell's argument the House
adjourned.