Daily independent. [volume] (Elko, Nev.) 188?-1915, 1891-04-11
i THE AMERICAN PREMIER.

The AMERICAN PREMIER.
i Comparison Between tho American and
English Speakers.
The parallel between the English and
tho American premiers is, of course, by
no means exact. In the first place, our
speaker is powerful only in Che house,
writes Albert Bushnell Hart in the At
lantic on "The Speaker as Premier"
while tho premier, through his major
ity in the house OF commons, may, and
frequently docs, ovcrawe the house Of
lords. The senate is not bound to rec
ognize the leadership of the speaker of
the house of representatives; but even
here there is an evident convenience in
having party chief, capable of laying
down policy OF successive measures
and of urging those measures through.
Whenever hereafter the two houses are
controlled by the same party, it is prob
able that somo junto, of which the
speaker is tho leading member, will ar
range 4 programme of legislation for
both houses. In the second place, the
speaker is chosen for n definite term of
two years, unless by vote compelled
sooner to resign. But parties in the
United States are much more stable
than in England. Tho party which
elects the speaker invariably holds it's
majority to tho end of that congress.
Nothing, therefore, but the disregard
of the wish of his own followers is like
~ to destroy the speakers power; and
when his followers no longer stand by
him, his position is much like that of
the premier against whom the house Of
commons has passed q vote Of want of
confidence.
The speaker must resign, and his POI
litical influence will be destroyed. The
executive part of the premicr's power is
not within reach of the speaker; but if
the tradition Of party action through
the speaker continues, the general pol
10y of the party will be formed so as to
include executive action. A president
who wishes to stand we'll with his party
is likely to aid in carrying out the pro-
grammc arranged by the junto of which
the speaker is the leading member.
This most recent addition to the
speakers power ha not been conferred
by recent vote Of the house in adopt
ing rules, and in fact is not expressed in
the constitution, the acts of congress, or
the rules of the house. It is n natural
growth, and part of the tendency
throughout the national, state and mu-
nicipal systems to put responsibility
upon individuals rather than upon
boards. 1t is n wholesome reaction
from the divided responsibility and
wasteful system of conducting the bust
ness of legislation. 1t secures ut least
the consideration of the measures held
by the leaders of the majority to be
most important. Those measures may
or may not be for the public good; but
under the new system the public has q
better opportunity to place RESPONSE
bility upon those members of congress,
who, under any system, must control
its operations, namely, the great leaders
of the majority. Tho system is, there
fore, likely to be continued in principle,
II not in the same form, by each party
when in the majority. The powers now
exercised by the speaker will probably
be exercised by each succeeding speak
or, and will somewhat increase. Since
the Legislative department in every re-
public constantly tends 10 gam ground
Mt the expense of the executive, the
speaker is likely to become, and per-
haps is already, moro powerful both
for good and for evil, than the president
Of the United States. He is premier in
legislation, it is the business of his party
that he be also premier in character, in
ability, in leadership or craftsmanship.
---------------------
Cotton III EonlDny.
In Bombay, as in Lancashire, Got
n