The Washington herald., 1909-03-24

=
following the stormy caucus Monday
night, and no evidences were given that
things would be patched up and harmony
restored 10 the ranks OF the minority
The bolters called yesterday on Champ
Clark, the minority leader. one by one.
and informed him that they would not
follow the course OF the party as set by
him. To every one Of them Mr.. Clark
said he didn't care. and TO others he ex-
pressed the same opinion as he has since
the twenty-three members Of his party
Joined Representative Fitzgerald and
saved the house organization from being
overrun BY the combination OF Demo-
Gratis and Republican insurgents-that all
who voted against the party were boilers.
pure and simple.
Representative Ollie James, OF Ken
tucky. a Democrat. who is the son OF a
Democrat whose father and grandfather
were Democrats, declared yesterday that
Champ Clark had better control over the
minority than any leader In the last ff-
teen years. He told OF the trying condi-
tions under which Mr.. Clark's leadership
had been tested. and complimenred the
MissOurian on the way he has conducted
things. Mr.. James says all that talk by
the boilers about disruption IN the party
is nonsense: that nobody but the bolters
puts any faith in what they say.
Statement from GeOrgIans.
Six members Of the Georgia delegation
IN the House. known by some OF the
members as high tariff Democrats. yes
terday issued a statement attempting 20
set themselves right for voting with the
Republicans 70 save the rules. The state
ment was signed by Representatives
Brantley. Livingston. Lee. Griggs. and
Edwards. and. in part. was as follows.
The action OF the caucus Monday night
in adopting rules 70 make the action OF
future caucuses binding under certain
conditions IS our complete vindication al
the hands OF the caucus itself for the
votes we cast on the day the House or
ganized. This action is an admission
that no binding rules have heretofore ex-
isted. This action also shows the folly
OF last nights caucus being held. and
what took place at the caucus IN the
way OF party dissensIon and personal
wrangling. and strife emphasizes the
folly. We are glad We were out OF Il.
We did not attend because we thought
our absence would be more conducive 10
harmony than our presence. II there were
present those who wanted 10 arrsign us.
we would not be there for reply. and our
silence would be that much gained Tor
harmony
our presence was not necessary 70
bind us II the caucus proposed 10 limit
itself 20 adopting rules for the future.
and II on the other hand the caucus pro
posed 10 censure or criticise Us for doing
what II is now admitted ne had a right
20 do. We did not intend by our presence
even seemingly 10 admit the existence OF
any party law or precedent for such
action.
We deplore the unseemly wrangle that
took place and shall not add 70 the dis
cord Of the occasion by a display OF feel
ing against any one. In justice 10 our
selves. however, We want 10 say concern
ing the first resolution adopted last
night. that a more indefinite and mean
ingless criticism could not have been
written. nor could there be any clearer
work Of supererogation than the dis
avowal Of responsibility that IS made
Criticism BaselesH.
The term 'Cannonism' is indefinite and
uncertain as 10 its meaning. II relates
either 70 the Individual or 20 the Repub-
licanism FOR which the individual stands.
If it relates to the individual. we laid the
for his elimination by our
action in proposing that Democrats in
sist on their Republican allies in vot-
ing against him, and the caucus threw
our proposals 10 the wind. II il relates
70 the Repubhcanism OF which the in
dividual is the exponent, we have no SYM
pathy with that, and the criticism is
baseless.
The caucus tries 10 justify a criticism
by saying that our action was In con-
hict' with previous caucus action. Our
critics could not say in violation OF
previous caucus action. because specific
was given IN the caucus by
Mr.. Clark for US TO vote for amendments
other than his. II is an unwarranted as
sumption OF authority for a majority OF
Democrats present al last nights caucus
to write into the Denver platform the
specific amendments TO the rules OF the
mouse that were IN the minds Of the
Denver convention delegates, but never
and then 10 say that because
we voted for other and different amend
ments in preference thereto we violated
the platform. To say that we voted 10
save 'Cannonism' is meaningless, and 20
say that In doing so we voted in conflict
with caucus action is more so, and then
In the same sentence 20 'dIsclaim' res
for our votes is absurd.
I'VE regret that the leadership Of our
fhOuUhf rr-fsa fO r,-f4o
wing Of the Republican party 10 save
the entire Republican party from
the wrath OF the people 90 unload
ng the responsibility Of that party upon
an underlined something called cannon
Sm-' The rules OF the House have never
handicapped the majority party.
Course Is Upheld.
LAS showing that our course IS con-
sistent. and the course OF Mr.. Clark ana
his followers is inconsistent, we cite the
Democratic caucus Of less than two years
ago. when the proposal Of Mr.. Jones. OF
Virginia, TO take from the minority
leader and reserve 10 the caucus the
power to make recommendation for
Democratic committee assignments re-
,eived the support Of but seven Demo-
Gratis, and Mr. Clark himself was one Of
those who voted against the proposal
"As showing also the insinceretv of the
pretended fight against one-man power
under the rules Of the House. we have
only to call attention TO the caucus of
March 10. where it was proposed thar
Democrats should take their voting or
aers olindly from Mr.. Clark on the floor
Of the House, and follow hts lead. re-
sardless Of where he went, and also "a
all attention to the other caucus held
hat evening. where it was solemnly' re-
solved that no Democrat should accent
committee assignment at the hands OF
ne Speaker unless Mr.. Clark consented
thereto"
Would Honor Allison.
A joint resolution has been offered bv