Los Angeles daily herald., 1890-01-30
THE CAR OF THE HOUSE
Speaker Reeds Extraordi.
nary Rulings.
ALL PRECEDENrs DIsREGARDED
The Most Bitter Fight Precipitated
That Has Taken Place in Con-
gress Since the War.
Associated Press Dispatches to the HERALD

Associated Press Dispatches to the HERALD
WASHINGTON, January 29.-In the
House today Dalzell called up the
Smith-Jackson contested election case,
and this precipitated the most bitter
struggle seen in the House in long
time. Crisp raised the question of con.
sideration. On the vote all the Demo-
Gratis but Buckalew, Covert and Cowles
refrained from voting.
While the Clerk was calling the roll
the Speaker was carefully counting those
Democrats present and not voting. The
vote was announced, yeas, 1S1; nays, 2.
Crisp raised the point of no quorum.
The Speaker directed the Clerk to
record the names of members present
and refusing to vote. This was the sig.
nal for burst Of applause on the Repub-
lican side, and jeers from the Demo
Gratis.
When the name of Breckenridge. of
Kentucky, was called, he stepped into
the aisle and shouted: 81 deny the
/
nounce it as revolutionary"
| Cheer after cheer, characterized by the
Republicans as "rebel yells," went up
from the Democratic side, and it was sew.
eral minutes before order was restored
even partially. While the Clerk was
reading the names dozen Democrats
were on their feet at one time, protesting.
Outhwaite, among others, shouted that
he was not present when his name was
called.
| Crisp appealed from the Chair.
The Speaker finally said: "The gen.
tleman must not mistake the situation.
He is not to compel the Chair to do
certain things; the Chair must proceed
in order. The Chair therefore rules that
there is quorum present within the
meaning of the Constitution.
Crisp appealed.
Payson moved to lay the appeal on the
table, but withdrew his motion at the re-
quest of Butterworth, who said the Dem
ocrats should be heard.
Crisp then said the decision of the
Speaker was overturning the uninter-
rupted practice of one hundred years, and
going directly in the face of the argu-
ments of distinguished Republicans.
He quoted from Speaker Blaine's
ruling on the Force bill, to the effect that
the Speaker had not the power to count
a quorum, snd declared that the decision
just made by Reed would be the founda.
tion of the greatest legislative frauds
ever committed. Crisp quoted Garfield,
denouncing similar rule proposed in
his time, and asking: "How do we
know but that the Speaker may zee (for
his own purpose) forty members more
than there are in the House?"
Cultivate renewed his charge that he
had been counted when not present, and
tremendous uproar ensued.
The Speaker remained imperturbable
and finally restored order.
Crisp continued: "We have lived
through a great civil war, when there
was excitement unparalleled in the his
tory of parliamentary action; yet, during
all those years, no man or no party ever
before thought it necessary to introduce
a rule which would give the
power of declaring the presence
Of membsrs by the single voice Of one
person.
II common with every member on his
side he demanded that there should be q
public exhibition of the question; that
there should be tellers. He quoted from
the remarks of Reed himself in de-
bote, in which Reed eaid: 1.-The consti.
tutional idea of quorum is not the
physical presence of a majority of the
mem bers of the House, but a majority
of the members present and participating
in the business" Triumphant cheers
on the Democratic side and in the GAL
Ilery.l
The Speaker then proceeded to make
the statement that the Clerk had an
nouuced the members voting 161 yeas,
2 nays. The Clerk thereupon, having
heard their names called in their pres
ence, had directed a record to be made
of this fact. Accordingly question was
now before the House, and the
Chair proceeded to give a state.
ment, accompanied by his ruling,
from which an appeal could be
taken. The Speaker, continuing, said
for some time question OF this nature
has been raised in many parliamentary
blages, and there had been great
deal of doubt, especially in this body, on
the subject. One of the first places
where the question had been raised was
in the New York State Senate. The
present Governor OF new Ork was the
presiding officer, and upon him devolved
a duty similar to that which now de-
volved on the Speaker. He met that
duty precisely in the same manner. The
Iquestion had arisen in New York on the
constitutional necessity of having three
fifths OF the members present to consti-
tute quorum for the passage of certain
bill, and the presiding officer held that
the constitutional provision as to a
quorum was entirely satisfied by the
presence Of the members, even if they
did not vote; that decision could not be
regarded as partisan. There also had
been decision in the Tennessee Legis-
lature in 1885. A bill was
pending which was objected to
by the Republicans, who refused to vote,
whereupon the Speaker directed the
Clerk to count in present those not vot-
ing, and declared the bill passed on that
reading. Those two decisions seemed
to the present occupant Of the
Chair, to cover the ground but
there Was an entirely familiar
process, which every old member would
recognize, whereby the Chair had at all
times the right to record the members
present as constituting part OF quorum.
1t had been an almost every day occur
renee at certain stages OF the lession, for
votes to be announced by the Chair,
tpopfoipipu ohv;ouolu op1 bof