The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1900-01-27
SEATTLE, SATURDAY, JANUARY ~.
Senatorial Freedom Of Debate.


10 denounce the freedom allowed to de-
bate in the United States senate AZ an
distraction to business and cause Of
public WEAKNESS. People see that the
house has settled upon system Of
closure that neither party would at
Tempt to discard. They have known
weeks or months to be occupied in
bringing a bill to a vote in the senate.
In extreme cases they know senators to
talk for hours merely to obstruct. ana
they have been dissusted and ashamed
when Stewart or Allen prosed to empty
seats while the progress of desirable
legislation Jagged. On the surface 1t
svas natural for them to conclude that
= Limitation Of the freedom Of debate
In the senate would be happy reform,
and movement to that end has been
made at every session.
A second glance at all that is involved
will place a large Interrogation point
after this conclusion. The test of ex-
perience is worth q good deal 1t has
shown a closure rule to be necessary
In the house. 1t has not proved that
in the senate. No one can point out an
instance where the will Of a majority
has been overriden and finally defeated.
The concession of rights to a minority
requires Of them In return fair play.
and this IL always granted. There is de-
lay, there may be wilful obstruction,
but there is no defeat Of majority rule.
The freedom Of senatorial debate works
Tor delfberation, caution, investigation.
slow procedure; 1t does not, cannot and
will not attempt to thwart the will Of
khe people.
The constitution and temper of the
house demand firm and vigorous rule
Numbers are large, passions high and
partisanship fierce. 1t has been demon
strated that, without closure. every ses-
sion would end with a prolonged dead
lock. The minority is always ready to
risk the chance Of an appeal to the peo-
pie IL it can delay thereby the carrying
out for one or two years Of the major
ity's policy. Unlimited debate there
means the stoppage of legislation. In
The senate It Is different. The number
of members is smaller They have six
btead Of two. It's traditions Of dignity
are against the rough and tumble Of
hlibustering. 1t is tacitiy understood
That acquiescence in vote after every
member has had a chance to be heard
Is the price OF full freedom Of speech.
Hence the privilege and its condition are
khus far preserved.
Let men who have judged hastily in
khis matter consider the value of having
n legislative body In which every bill
may be discussed until the whole
ground has been covered: one chamber
truly deliberative; one branch of the
law-making body In which member.
Though he represent but the smallest
constituency, has an equal voice and
right with every other Necessity. the
growth of population. representation,
large issues. party feeling. all have
made it impossible in the lower house.
The time there must be limited to suf-
iIcent for a clear presentation OF the
pnam ISSUES by one or two speakers. IT
II >-e-- rnar rnere should be another
body in which the last word can be
said.
Take the financial bill, for illustration.
The house disposed of it ably and
swiftly. Probably no completer EXPOSE
hon of the subject viii be made than
The speech Of Mr.. McCleary. But the
debate covered only few hours, and
the American people are busy and
hasty. Yet they do need the sort of in
Formation that is derived from discus