Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1892-01-30
MAIDEN SPEECH.

Mr.. Bailey Of Texas, the youngest member OF
the House, who came TO Washington With quite
a reputation for oratory, then took the moor and
fully justified that reputation. lie mas COM
manding presence, q handsome cehr-cut face, a
powerful voice, and O graceful delivery. The
greatest attention was paid TO his re-
marks, which were directed 70 an sdvo-
cacy Of Mr.. Hookers motion. He opposed
the rule as reported because II was an
essential departure from the traditions OF the
Democratic party. departure which be was I'M
willing TO SEQ become the law OF the House ex-
cept over his respectful protest. The American
people were to-day living under surveillance
unknown 10 the Constitution, because they were
living under q System OF committee govern
ment. The proposed rule gave 10 the majority
of the triumvrate OF the COMMITTEES On Rules
tho power 10 decide what Affirmative action
should be taken by the House.
Such a power ought not 10 DO delegated except
In cases d absolute and pressing necessity. Tho
Democrats had majority OF two thirds, and
with that majority IL could safely and properly
suspend all rules should necessity require 1t. III
the Democrats adopted this rule they were
estopped hereafter from criticising the Fifty
first Congress, and the distinguished gentleman
man who presided over its deliberations.
Applause on Republican sde.l IL embodied
the very essence OF his (Mr. Reed's) philoso-
ply In the transaction OF public business. The
fifty-nrst Congress proposed 70 stop hiipuster-
ing by empowering its presiding oflcer TO de-
eide what we're and what were not dilatory mo-
tiona. This Congress proposed TO give the same
power &c the two men composins the majority
OF tho Committee on Rules IL this proposition
we're agreed to, tho House would simply change
the master and not the task. Ii be-
came the high and bounden duty OF re-
representatives. TO provide with all posi-
Bile care against the perversion ana abuse
OF power As between the Speaker and the
Committee on Rules, 1t was an open question In
bis mind whether Il was not better 20 confer
power upon the Speaker alone. The Speaker
was the organ OF the House, and from his high
place he must deliver his opinion In the presence
OF bis colleagues and before his countrymen.
The com mittee was subject 10 no such limitations
Il was one degree further removed from the
people the source OF power.
THE RULE COMPROMISE.
Mr., Boatner, Of Louisiana, and Mr.. Goodnight
of Kentucky, gave their adherence 20 the rule
claiming that Ii was not In pursuance OF the
rule of the last House, but was compromise
between the one-man nllbustsring power and
the one-man presiding power.
Mr. Enloe, OF Tennessee. preferred that the
business OF the House should be regulated by a
COMMITTEES on order OF business, but II thai
could not DO done he was IN favor OF the pro-
posed rule. The rules Of the Fftisth Congress
good In the rules Of the Fifty-rrst Congress:
fApplause and lsughtsr.1 There was lot Of
bsd things In them, too; but he wanted 70 prom
by experience and incorporate what was good IN
the rules OF the Fifty-nrst Congress IN the Code
that would govern the Fifty-second Congress-.
Mr.. Washington. Of Tennessee, argued that
under the proposed rule the House would nave
complete control over lie business, IN ha'
il could at any time direct the Committee on
Rules 10 report rule setting apart any particu-
lar measure for immediate consideration.
Mr.. oates, OF Alabama, offered an amend
meut providing for the appointment Of . CON-
mittee on order OF business to consist OF nftesn
members (ten Democrats and i've OF the opposi-
toni. which shall have leave 70 report ~ any
time, and Of which the Speaker shall DO sx-ogeid
Without reaching action the House adjourned
until tomorrow.
a Democratic caucus was announced for to.
morrow evening.
adjourned yesterday until Monday.