The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1890-02-11
REEDS RULE.
The Debate Over the New Code Begun
in the House.

The Debate Over the New Code Begun
in the House.
WASHINGTON, Feb. 10.-In the House
this afternoon the journal of Thursdays
proceedings was read, and although the
of that document they insisted upon yea
and nay vote upon its approval. 1t was
approved by 149 yeas to nay (Mr. Bucka-
levi, the speaker counting quorum.
The journal of Fridays proceedings, con-
tanning no ruling by the speaker on the
point of counting quorum, was approved
without demur.
z Mr. Cannon of Illinois, from the commit
tee on rules, reported back the new code of
rules, and the House proceeded to consider
it. 1t was understood that for to-day the
debate should be carried on without limita-
tion, and no arrangement was arrived at
as to when the discussion would terminate.
CANNON EXPLAINS AND DEFENDS.
In explaining the provisions of the code,
Mr.. Cannon stated that of the forty-seven
rules, which governed the last House,
twenty-nine were reported without mate
rial change. The changes were such as
would enable the will of the majority to be
ascertained and expressed with accuracy
and with the utmost expediency consistent
with fair and due debate and considerat on.
He defended the pr Jposed change
prohibiting the speaker from en-
tertainlng dilatory motions. No speaker
would dare to refuse to entertain
a motion until it was patent to all that it
was dilatory, and then the speaker should
refuse to entertain it. He denied that the
proposed rule was tyrannical; but if it was,
then it was tyranny sustained by ma
jority Of the House. If he had to
choose between the tyranny OF constl-
tutional majority, responsible to the people
and tyranny of an irresponsible minority,
he would stand by the constitution, and so
act as to let the majority rule. Discussing
the rule permitting the speaker to count a
quorum, he said that if the democrats
wanted to go to the country as against the
principle contained in the rule, the repub-
hcaus were ready to meet them, and let the
people choose, But as sure a. the repub-
i licaus remained in the majority they would
perform the functions that the constitution
and the people made it their duty to per-
form
MILLS DENoUNCEs THE CHANGES.
Mr. Mills said that the proposed code
would reverse legislative action and run
back upon the track upon which the
Il govern nent had been running forward for
a century. 1t was founded upon the propo-
sltlon that the minority had no rights; that
the majority was all powerful; that it spoke
i BY inspiration, and that its action was i'm
4 pregnable. 1t was founded on tne principle
Il that king was divinely appointed and that
ne could do no wrong. That was not the
n theory upon which the fathers had bullded
THIS great temple If liberty. 1t was not the
60eory upon which any government on this
81 Continent had been founded.
4 Mr. Bayne of Pennsylvania justified the
Committee on rules in bringing in the pro
20 d code. His argument was largely de-
Voted to the defense of the constitutionallty
OF the speaker permitting the counting Of
members present and not voting, to maze @
Il quorum, and he cited the practice of many
state legislatures and legal decisions in sup
port Of his views.
4 Mr.. Blount of Georgia made an argument
m opposition TO the proposed rules, dwell
4 ang espe ial antagonism upon the CLAUSE
making 100 members a quorum in commit
Tee Of the whole,
Tending discussion, the House at 5:S
Il O'Clock adjourned.