Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1910-03-20
The Doom of House Oligarchy
Was Forecasted Early IN Day

rs early as IL CLOCK yesterday loie
noon it was apparent that the Hous
organization was doomed to defeat
asst effort of the insurgents and regular
10 agree upon compromise which
would save the Speakers face ha
failed and when the conference brok
lp the respective parties to it starte
n to form their lines for the .battl
which was to ensue upon the floor.
1t was known, even at that hour, ina
he allies had the votes at their com
nand to put through their program
rhey soon showed they had no dispt
,ition to halt the work. AS soon
he House assembled and the journa
lad been read, the Speaker announce
his intention TO rule upon the Norri
-esomton. which had been pending sine
Thursday.
As the Speaker took his stand on tn
he was greeted with prolonge'
.heers by the republican regulars. Tn
democrats were silent, and the fnsur
cents sat grimly in their seats, utter
ng no sound The Speaker read HI
-uling from manuscript. He said:
The chair has been somewhat criti-
Used because in this matter he has
been slow to rule But the question
which was brought SO Unexpectedly
upon the attention of the House, in
n revolutionary manner, as II seems.
tosthe chair, is of such transcendent
Importance to the future procedure of
the House that the fullest. even the
most protracted, discussion seemed
justifiable. In no other manner could
the most complete information be
brought to the consideration of the
question, and in no other way could
the largest participation of the MEN,
bership of the House be assured.
- Arose Thirty Years Ago.
The question of constitutional priv
iiege in this House has not been re-
Viewed, and the principles governing
for the last thirty years have not,
prior TO this week, been questioned in
the House for many years. Those
principles are relatively simple. 1t has
been held always that the ordinary
legislative duties and functions of the
House. exercised by authority of the
Constitution. must proceed according
Il, the order prescribed by the rules.
The fact that the Constitution says
that the House shall have power to-
lay taxes, regulate commerce, make
naturalization laws, coin money, es-
tablish post offices, create courts. sup
port armies and a navy, etc. has not
given those subjects. when embodied
in bills, any right to disturb the order
OF business provided by the rules. The
very object of the rules is to provide
an orderly way for considering those
and other subjects intrusted to it's
Judgment To give all those subjects
constitutional privilege would be to
establish constitutional chaos in the
House.
There are. however. certain functions
which the Constitution enjoins on Con-
gress to do. and fixes the time for
doing those things. Thus, the clause
directing the disposition of a bill We
nv no not ho
House shall proceed to consider il.
This has always been understood as
meaning that the House should at
once proceed to some act of consid
Grafton. And therefore 1t has been
held that no rule should prevent the
House from proceeding to this con-
stitutional duty.
Census Also Enjoined.
In like manner the Constitution spec
ifes that the Congress shall provide
for census of population and an ap
portionment of representatives, and
specifies the time when it shall do it.
every tenth year. Therefore, on the
tenth year bills to make the required
provisions have been admitted with
out regard to the requirements of the
rules Whether that construction pro-
iceeded too far. when the Constitution
gave a year within which to perform
the duty, is matter as to which there
might be doubt. But for thirty years
the practice was unvarying, and when
confronted with the question this
week the chair followed the practice
of the House, as he would obey every
other rule, without questioning the
wisdom that originally created 1t.
Today. however. the chair Is asked
TO permit a proposition for a new rule
to- Ill he ,ln
scribing the order or business require
us to proceed 10 other matters, and
IL is claimed that the chair would be
justified in doing this because the Con-
stitution says that each house may
determine the rules of its proceedings"
Whether the word may" means
shall or not the chair will not stop
TO examine The Constitution fixes
no time when IL shall be done, and as
the House may. and has I'm one notable
instance, proceed without rules, II does
not seem 10 the chair that there is
here given any constitutional mandate
which would justify the overriding OF
the rules.
Hanks Back to Precedent.
Fortunately In this crisis the chair
is not compelled to rely on his own
judgment, swayed as it might be by
the passions and purposes OF this
hour He can look back to another
hour. when In a day of calm The
navigators who steered the business
of this House took their latitude and
longitude 'unembarrassed by the emer-
gencies of tempest.
The pathway of the chair has been
blazed, not by, any flushed majority
in a moment of factional success. not
for any ends of one political party as
opposed to the wishes OF another po-
ifticai party, not under auspices
which prejudice the chair because Of
memories of political affiliations of
his own, but on a question OF order
raised by great democratic floor
leader of this House and decided by a
great democratic Speaker.
December 13. 1873. this identical
question arose In the House. Mr..
Roger @. Mills. Of Texas proposed
as question of constitutional priv
jlege. exactly as is proposed today
10 offer from the floor for immediate
consideration q proposition looking
to the amendment OF the rules. And
when objection was made. as ii is
made today, Mr.. Mills argued: 1T
is the constitutional privilege OF q
House of Representatives to adopt
rules at any time; it is a continuing
power of which the House cannot
divest ITSELF
Speaker Raudall,s Ruling.
The mem1.ers of the House did no,