Waterbury evening Democrat., 1894-01-15

| this is the foundation upon which the whole | American government rests, it is not likely | any one will arise to complain. Over in | England they are joining the procession. Your correspondent while in London last 1 summer visited the house of commons and | saw the principle of majority rule carried | to fully as great an extreme as it has ever | been carried here under Reed and Crisp. l The difference was that Mr. Gladstone, the | head of the executive branch of the govern ment, was in that case the personal leader. It was as if President Cleveland were to | drive up Pennsylvania avenue from the I White House, enter the capitol, appear at | his place in the hall of the commons and | crack his whip.
 The speaker of the British house of con- mons to this day occupies position simi- lar to that which our speakers occupied in | the old times-that is to say, he is 'the
 creature of the house." He has no power | save that which the house lras conferred | upon him, and it is his duty not to lead, | not to control, not to press this meas
 ure forward into life and keep that one | back to it's death-not to mold policies and | keep his party on the path which, in his | opinion, it should follow-but simply to act as the presiding officer, as the chairman of the meeting, as the moderator of order.
 as the mouthpiece of the chamber. He is | expected to do this with absolute impar-
 tiality not only as between individuals, but i as between political parties.
 A Comparison.
 Between the American system as we now find it and the English system as it has slowly developed one may take his
 choice. There are arguments in both direc-
 tions The English would be very much
 shocked if their speaker of the commons were to attempt to control that body and shape its legislation. If he were to declare one measure should be passed while an- other should never be brought to a vote
 probably they would impeach him for
 nsurpation. If they had speaker who was always contriving for the advantage of one of the parties in the chamber and had his lieutenants and favorites on the floor who secured recognition through pre- arranged plans and for the accomplishment of agreed upon results, there would be a howl of indignation throughout Great Britain, Ireland Scotland and Wales. There would be letters by the bushel In The Times, and the press would thunder and roar.
 The Old Tradition.
 On the other hand, Americans could nev- CT endure the spectacle of the chief of the executive department of their government assuming personal control of the popular branch of the national legislature The old tradition-it is in some respects only tra- dition-that the executive and legislative departments must be kept altogether sep arate would in that case be too palpably violated. It is violated in effect every day, but the people do not often see it. If MT. Cleveland were to appear among the rep resentatives, place himself at the head of his partisans and ride roughshod over the opposition. as Mir. Gladstone appears among the commoners, it would be our time to grow indignant, to write letters to the newspapers and to applaud while the press thundered. That is the difference between the two systems and the two peoples.
 One Reform Needed.
 The speaker of the commons occupies position more like that of our vice president as presiding officer of the senate. The sen