St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1892-01-30
motions might nullify the will of the
An EIoquent Texan.

Mr.. Bailey, of Texas, the youngest
member of the house, and who came TO
Washington with quite reputation for
OratOry, then took the floor, and he fully
justified that reputation. He mas a
commanding presence, a handsome,
clear-cut race, a powerful voice and a
graceful delivery. The greatest at
tention was paid to his remarks, which
were directed to an advocacy or
MIR. HOoker's motion. He opposed the
rule as reported because it was
an essential departure from the tradl-
tiOnS of the Democratic party--a depart
ure which he was unwilling to see be-
come the law of the house except over
his respectful protest.
The American people, he said, were
today living under Il surveillance UNI
known to the constitution, because they
were living under system of committee
government. The proposed rule gave
10 the majority of the triumvirate OF the
committee on rules the power to decide
what affirmative action should be taken
by the entire house. Such a power ought
not to be delegated except in cases of
absolute and pressing necessity. The
Democrats had majority of twO-thirds,
and with that majority they could safely
and properly suspend all rules Should
necessity require it.
Estopped From Criticising.
If the Democrats adopted this rule
they were estopped hereafter from crit
icizing the Fifty-firSt congress and the
distinguished gentleman who presided
over its deliberations. Applause on
Republican side.
MIR. Enloe, of Tennessee, preferred
that the business of the house should
q a nv NIT
of business; but If that could not be
done he was in favor of the proposed
rule. The rules of the Fiftieth congress
were dO-nOthing rules. There was
something good III the rules of the Fif-
ty-firSt congress. Applause and
laughter.] There was lot OF bad in
them, too, but he wanted to profit by
experience, and incorporate what was
good in the rules of the Fifty-frst con-
greSS III the code that would govern the
Fifty-SecOnd congress.
Mr.. Buchanan, Of New jersey, advO-
Gated the rule as an enlargement of the
liberty of representatives, and not a
contraction thereof. He was pleased
from Tennessee (Mr. Enioe) in stating
that there was good in the rules of tue
Fifty-frst congress. His own idea was
that the whole mass of rules Of the
house had become obsolete and burden
some. Mr.. Breckenridge, of Kentucky,
thought that all the
Talk About Filibuster
amounted to nothing. As rule the
tilibusterer was frst-rate fellow. Fiji
tee II years ago he had prevented the
force bill from being put upon the
South. This allustion to Mr.. Randall
was greeted with applause.] The filibus-
terer had defeated the educational bill.
1t was not true that the filibusterer was
entirely to be cut. 1t was well some
times to be on good terms with him.,
Mir. Oates, of Alabama, offered an
amendment providing for the appoint
ment of a committee OH order of buSi-
ness to consist of fifteen members tier
Democrats and five of the opposition(,
which shall have leave to report at any
time. and of which the speaker shall be
ev-offIciO chairman.
Mr.. Cockran, of New York, said that
If a majority could not abSolutelyeo
troll representative bedy then parfia-
mentary institutions" were without eN-
euse for their existence. After further
debate, but without action, the house
adjourned until tomorrow.
During the debate, ON the contested
rule several of the Democratic leaders
had held IN informal conference and
discussed the wisdom of oalIing~a party
caucus to secure unity of action among
the Democratic members. 1t was final
ly decided that such course WAS iM-
perative, and Immediately after adj
Journment the caucus was announced
for tomorrow evening at 7:30 o'clock.