The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1893-03-22
yhe First Fruits.

Ehe First Fruits.
We publish elsewhere the first two an
swers to our invitation to discuss the legis-
lative problem, and invite the attention of
our readers TO them. One was intended
ss private letter but as it probably voices
sentiments that are TO be found elsew here
We take the liberty of printing it anony
mously for The purpose OF answering it.
We regret that both correspondents have
overlooked the chief point to which we
called attention, which is that the major
ity does not govern in leg slative bodies.
There Is a constant tendency to centraliza-
ton OF power in parliamentary govern
ment that actually defeats the republican
theory OF government. But a short time
since we found that under par iamentary
rules Mr.. REED v as abs to shut off the
minority from any participation in legis-
lation. In the congressional session OF
1912 We found that under parliamentary
rules it was impossible to get before the
house of representatives bill repeating
the duty on refined sugar which had been
established by the Mckinley law for
the benefit of the sugar trust.
In our last legislature SINH
lar situation was presented as
to several important bills And yet, il is
perfectly ain that the makers of our
constitution intended that the majority
should rule. majority can enact a law
even over the governors veto. according
to the provisions of the constitution.
Where a larger vote was deemed proper,
as in case of impeachment. it was speci-
fed in the constitution. Nevertheless,
We find that by a system of parliamentary
rules the constitutional idea is completely
overthrow. and that a majority cannot
pass laws at all. This seems to us a seri
Gus evil, a tremendous obstacle in the
path of progress. There is nothing polit-
ical in it from partisan stand. A repub-
hcan legislature is as subject to ii as
democratic legislature. 1t is a defect in
our system of government. This was the
chief point to which We directed Atten-
ton, but incidentally 1t brings up the
whole question of legislation, and we
are wiling to consider any phase of it.
Both of our correspondents d welt largely
on the personnel of the last legislature,
both are right We have said before
and wish it to be clearly understood.
that in our opinion the legislature was
above the average in intelligence. We
have stated ?. ainly our opinion that IL
was largely the victim of its organization
A Of. A.
the same time there Is a great deal of
force In the idea that a legislator ought to
have some sort OF training for his work,
and that not oulY this legislature, but also
every legislative BODY in tue country is
detective in this respect. Mere former
experience is not what is wanted. nor
would there be any possibility of sending
legislators to school, as did the popu lists
OF Nebraska with the man whom they
elected Judge when he knew no law. In
our opinion the man is best trained for
legis alive work who is accustomed to in
vest0ate before he acts. If all Legislators
had that habi: there would not be much
bad legislation. We do not see why any
man should be nominated for the
legis ature to whom his neighbors would
not be viii ing to trust the management of
personal affairs OF their own, and certain
ly they would not trust man who acted
without knowing what he was about.
1t is notorious that legislators very fire.
quently do this, and ways have done CO.
SIR ROBERT PEEL expressed a general
truth whrn he said of the 'encumbere
estates act" that lit was SO good a measure
that he really wondered how 1t had got
passed" A very strong testimony Is that
OF EDWIN CHADWICK, one OF the greatest
pub icists England ever prOduc- d, who for
wears acted as commissioner of inquiry in
charitable, criminal and labor investiga-
tions, and who dec ares that he never
knew a single investigation which did
not reverse every main principle and al
most every assumed chief fact on which
the genera. public, parliamentary commit
tees, politicians OF high position, and often
the commissioners themselves were pre-
pared to base legislation. How can egis-
latOrs acquire such information? Posi-
bly, 1t may be done through open discus
sion OF needed reforms in the public press,
as was done in the case of the ballot law.
and as we are now endeavOring to do in
the matter of legislative reform.
Our friend "Anonym" suggests that it
is impossible to secure prop-r legislation
in so short a session as sixty days. We
do not think so, if the legislators attend
to business. The legislature of 1889
passed more and better laws in a session
of sixty days than any preceding legisla-
ture passed in 100 days. Why cannot
another legislature make sons approach
to its record? The trouble with the last
legislature WAS certain not altogether
lack of information or lack of time. For
example. the question of taxation has
been pretty thoroughly discussed in In
diana in the last Two years, and legis ators
might reasonably be expected to have
considerable information concerning it.
The state board OF tax commissioners had
been specially charged with the duty