Atlanta semi-weekly journal. (Atlanta, Ga.) 1898-1920, 1909-03-23
GEORGIA CONGRESSMAN DEFEND THEIR ACTION
IN BOLTING DEMOCRATIC CAUCUS ON RULES

that there is no distinction between Can
nonism and Republicanism, for they are
one and the same thing Whether called
by one name or the other, however, 1t
can only be measured by its results
i'm the way Of legislation achieved or
legislation defeated. and whatever the
complaint Of the country by reason of
the result.it should be directed against
the Republican party. The rules of the
house are necessarily framed to enable
the party in power to carry out its poll
cies, and under the old rules the Republi-
can party for the past fourteen years
has been carrying out its policies. What
has been done and what has been I'M
done is chargeable, not to its speaker,
but to the party itself. The speaker has
merely voiced the will of the party that
put him in Office.
Questioned the Wisdom
I'VE were not invited into any of the
caucuses or conferences that led up
to the reported agreement be-
tween a few Democrats and a few
insurgent Republicans At the time of
trese conferences the Democrats of the
sixty-first congress were unorganized and
had no leader Their first caucus was
est Monday morning. when a leader was
elected When we learned of the pro-
posed coalition. while we questioned the
wisdom of departing from the demand of
the Denver platform and not presenting
specific amendments to the rules, and
also questioned the wisdom of trusting
revision to nine Republicans and six
Democrats. and while we could see no
special triumph for Democracy in plac-
ing insurgent Republicans over organ
lied Republicans and particularly so. as
the insurgeRt Republicans claimed no
~, ~
was to be again committed to follow the
lead of the disgruntled members of some
other party, that our party should get
something out of such cOmmittal. We
therefore suggested at the first oppor-
tunity we had, which was at the Monday
caucus that as a basis of common action
between Democrats and insurgent Repub-
licans the latter should agree to certain
things, to-wit: to vote for some other
person than Mr.. Cannon for speaker. to
assist in amending the rules during this
extra session and not wait until next
December. and 10 stand with the Demo-
Gratis for a reasonable debate on the tar
iff bill and a reasonable opportunity to
offer amendments to it,
I'VE thought II insurgent Republicans
were in good faith denouncing what they
had led the country to call Cannonism,
they should be willing to vote against
it's chief exponent Mr.. Cannon.
1--WE thought our other suggestions only
fair and reasonable They were all re-
jected by the Democratic caucus on Mon
day
I'm what we say, we are not criticising
our Democratic brethren, nor Mr.. Clark.
for whom we have always entertained
the kindliest feeling and greatest re-
spect.
1--WE regard it as unfortunate that a
caucus on so important a matter as
accepting the leadership of Republicans.
on anything could not have been called
early enough to have allowed full and
free discussion. II was perhaps inevi-
table that caucus called for a time
just two hours before the house was to
meet, had to be conducted under arbi-
trary rules that denied discussion and
information. 1t is probable that If the
caucus had been held at an earlier period
that a complete understanding between
ali Democrats could have been reached.
I'VE see no reason now, however, for
Democrats to fall out with one another
because every one acted according to his
best judgment for what hep believed was
the best interest of the party and the
country