The Bennington evening banner. (Bennington, Vt.) 19??-1961, 1910-03-31
FOSTERS SIDE OF STORY
First District Congressman "El
nlalnsn his Recent Attitude.

plains his Recent Attitude.
Charles A. Webb in a letter to the
ST. Adams Messenger tells Hon D. J.
Fosters side of the story in relation
10 the recent fight over the House
rules. Mr. Webb's letter is as fol
lows.
Washington, March Congress-
man Frank Plumley last week declar
ed himself in favor of more liberal
rules in the House when he voted for
the Norris resolution for a commit
tee on rules of ten members instead
OF FIVE and divesting the speaker of
so much power by eliminating him
from that committee. Throughout
the historic fight last week Mr. Plum
ley had voted with the so-called reg
ular Republicans until it came to the
Norris resolution. Il was matter
of Judgment with him throughout.
He voted with the regulars in refus-
ing to sustain the appeal from the
decision of the speaker with refer
ence 10 the consideration of changes
in the rules as constitutional privi-
lege because he thought in oyer-rul-
ing the speakers decision it would
establish a dangerous precedent in
the House and throw open the doors
for the consideration of all sorts OF
measures out of the regular order OF
things and thereby impede the pro
gress Of legislation
Mr. Plumley has been in favor Of
more liberal rules and when the Nor
ris substitute resolution was offered
which to Mr.. Plumley's mind was an
improvement over the original one
providing for Is members to be cho'
sen by districtzation of states, he
saw fit to cast his vote for 1t al
though he would have preferred the
Martin resolution which would have
permitted, If the House so voted, the
nominal retention of the speaker OF
10 I9puIpm9I 9ql IoJ 99llImWoo gu
this session. AS to his vote agains
the resolution declaring the speakers
chair vacant, Mr.. Plumley said tina
he would have voted for such meas
ure regardless of any personality o
the speaker because he realized tina
to precipitate fight for the speaker
| sup Ill Tic lhluob Vi NhN oNoSAOA
would have set back the Legislation
and thrown the House into chaos.
Congressman n. J. Foster voteC
with the regular Republicans through
out that historic fight in the HOUSE
last week and in explaining his posi-
ton said that he objected to tn,
Norris resolution because the Repuh
licans had no voice in the matte
and, because he, as member OF thu
congressional campaign committee
lad already declared himself in fay
or of more liberal rules which it wa
planned by the Republicans to brinI
about If possible later in the session
There was an understanding be
tween the Republican and Insurgen
leaders that no fight on the rule
should be precipitated until the Pres
ident's legislative program had beer
carried out. Mr.. Norris, however
took advantage of the opportunity OF
fered by the decision on the census
question and seeing a chance of vic
tory took it upon himself TO stir vi
the fight right away Mr.. Foste
criticized the manner In which Mr.
Norris distributed the time allowed
for debate on the Norris resolution
saying that he used the present rule
of the House, which his resolution
proposed to remedy, TO prevent thu
regulars from consideration OF thu
question or any amendment of tn
resolution.
Dir. Foster said he would hay'
been very glad to vote for more lib
eral rules if the Republicans coult
have taken a hand in their perfec
ton. Mr.. Martin proposed substi
tute resolution which Mr. Foster, il
common with many other Republi
cans would have gladly supported
BY moving the previous question MI
Norris prevented a vote on this sub
stitute. He was of the opinion tina
the calendar Wednesday which h
was able to materially assist in get
ting through about year ago ha'
really accomplished more than an.
change in the rules could have don'
because ii had taken away the oh
jectionable powers of the rules com
mittee.
Mr. Foster said that he knew
would have been the popular thin!
at home to have voted for the Norris
resolution but, in view OF his previ