The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1910-06-20
SPEAKER CANNoN's DEFENSE.

1t is not singular that Speaker Can
non should come to the defense of th
old and arbitrary rules of the Hous,
of Representatives. 1t is, however
something of surprise for him to de
fend them on the ground that he does
To hear Cannon S exposition Of the ap
plication of the old rules, one might
suppose that there had never been suct
81 thing as an invasion Of the rights OF
members of the House by the Speak
or and by the bosses with whom he acts
But the fact is that Speaker Cannon
has constantly punished his enemies by
means of those rules, rewarded his
friends through the same. and by them
has relegated TO obscurity the best and
most expert members on various PROPOSE
tions that were up and to come up in
the House. One needs go no further
than his deposition of Representative
Fowler of New Jersey from the chair
manship Of the House Committee on
Banking and Currency and his putting
of Mr.. Vreeland in his place as chair
man, TO see the arbitrary way IN
which Speaker Cannon used his power
Mr.. Fowler is a great expert In the
matter Of banking and currency, but
he was not Cannon man MT
Vreeland is an impracticable theorist on
the subject, as was shown in his urg-
ing upon Congress his wholly imprac-
ticablc bill, the one known as the Aid
rich. .Vreeland currency bill, which was
enacted into law and which proved to be
absolutely futile in operation; nobody
pays the least attention to it., its pro
visions were dead,letter from the time
of their enactment; but he was for Can
non, hence his promotion.
Speaker Cannon contended that the
rules as enforced by him, chad never
interfered with the will of the majority
of the House, when an actual majority
had been obtained on any proposition, -
which is glarlng subterfuge. Speaker
Cannon has always assumed that he
knew what the majority of the House
wanted, and what 1t was best to do;
and the only way to override his
opinion or Judgment was to organize
formidable revolt, as was done not
long ago when the House almost de-
posed him from the position of Speak
er, and did insist upon and achieve an
amendment of the rules which gave
members some privilege and power that
they had not heretofore possessed. A
Speaker who assumes that he is car
rying out the will of the House and
proceeds TO act on that assumption to
the oppression of the members, may
Justify himself in his position by the
claim that Speaker Cannon makes, but
those members who are trampled un-
der foot, whose rights are invaded and
their positions taken away from them
through personal animosity, jealousy, or
at the behest of an "lnner CIRCLE for
political reasons. are no admirers Of
that sort of arbitrary work. Speaker
Cannon S assumption that he was act
ing in conformity with the will of the
House simply because he was able to
put HIS hleVhoNo ip'o Nh'NS''
will be like rubbing salt and vinegar
into the wounds that he has inflicted
Speaker Cannon would have done bet
ter, it seems TO us, if he had come out
fairly and sauarely and said that the
rules gave him the power that he ex-
ercised and that he exercised it in his
own way according to his best judg-
ment and with the arbitrary snap that
the rules allowed. To depart from this
ground, which was the ground that he
actually assumed in his acts, and to en-
ter a palliative plea such as he has
done in his so-called defense of the
rules, is to step down from the high
ground of arbitrary power into the
morass of special pleading which de-
ccives no one, but actually hurts the
Speakers case What need. after all,
has a glorious old political buccaneer
such as he is, of any defense at all!
His acts speak for him, and all that he
needs to say to his admirers is that he
is what he is, and has done what he
has done, and their applause is sure;
while as to the id insurgents, they
are not worth considering any way;
they should all be hanged.