New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1892-01-27
HOUSE RULES DISCUSSED.
MR. REEDS CRITICISM OF THE CHANGES.
wAsrEFU1. OF TIME AND PRODUCTIVE OF AN
NoYANCE-" TYRANNY THAT HAS


NoyANCE-" TYRANNY" THAT HAS
CEASED TO BE TYRANNY.
Washington Jan. 26-ln the House today Mr..
Catchings of Mississippi, called up the report OF the
COMMITTEES on Rules containing the proposed new code
nj rules general debate being limited hours.
Nir Catchngs made brief explanation of the code.
sat,ne that il WAS composed substantially Of the rules
governing the Lth Congress. the notifications being
in the interest Of the dispatch of business and
trenchment of public expenditures.
Mr. Reed of Maine. criticised the proposed rules and
extolled the rules OF the List Congress. As far
the Introduction Of bills concerned the proposed
change would result in consumption Of the time OF
the House. an annoyance to members and an exceed
ing irIegulsrty. He sarcastically congratulated the
Democratic party on taking a step forward in advo-
eating a rule making 1t In order TO call for con-
sideratlOn a report from the Committee on Rules and
pending the consideration for the Speaker to entertain
one motion to adjourn after the announced
not to entertain any other dlatory motion. lie was
glad that 1t had ceased 10 be tyranny for that
committee present bills for the consideration Of the
House. But this advance was one-sided Underthe
proposed rule whenever the Committee on Rules wished
TO cut OFF ibusterng ID could do and 1t right
that II should. But the majority of the House should
at all times the right. Under the rule the
minority might rule except where the Committee OH
Rules took the initiative. The minority was sacred
when 1t had the Committee Rules its SIDE and
was of no account when the Committee was opposed
TO II.
The House had a right at any time to insist that
obstruction to it's onward march OF legislation should
be moved out Of the way. The Speaker OF the House
(the organ Of the majority and OF the House, shoud
have only the right but the duty devolved upon
him 70 suppress flibuserng Just he had the right
TO suppress any other disturbance that might occur
The questions which the people presented ought to
he decided by their representatives, 1t was NOS
forh i'm %
stituted a Quorum In the House. The Supreme Court
of the United would he hoped pass upon
that He entertained an unfaltering faith that the
Supreme Court would follow the decisions of every
Supreme Court AVID every justice of every supreme
Court that had passed upon the question. \
quorum of this body constituted by the members
present.
He proceeded to argue against the power given 10
place riders upon appropriation bills, provided that
tho amendments offered tetrenched expenditures
He was opposed to anything which lowered the power
and dignity Of the House. The power that the House
took away from itself a power when it could not
take away from the senate
Mr. Lanham of Texas. availed himself of the wide
scope given general debate 10 make a speech IN
favor of the free coinage of silver.
Mr. Bowers. of California, criticised the proposed
rules His people want some appropriations for their
hartors II he understood the report of the commit
tee Alright, unless he could get a pull on the Com
mittee on Rivers and Harbors, he twas not IN It,
(Laughter)
OPPOSITION to free silver.
MIR BURROWS of Michigan, brought the debate back
critical analysis of the proposed rules and Mr. NILS
OF Texas made brief reply. Mr.. Mckenna, OF Cal
ifornia also addressed the House in criticism OF Inc
new code and then the House adjourned until to-
morrow.