Willmar tribune. [volume] (Willmar, Minn.) 1895-1931, 1911-01-18

~s~~O
Publicity has scored again. Some
of the statesmen began to hear.
from home regarding their support
of the Cannonistic regulations re-
ported and railroaded thru by the
Committee on Rules. Fearful of
further fights and further publicity.
there were consultations and then
the decision that public opinion
was an influence too powerful to be
opposed by politicias in their un-
tenable position. Accordingly the
Rules Committee recommended for
adoption three of the vital reforms
demanded by the progressives.
#
Two insurgents. Kerry C. Conley
OF Rochester and w. A. Campbell
of Minneapolis. championed amend
ments intended to end the loose bus
mess methods that have prevailed
in the purchasing of supplies for the
House. For years the Chief Clerk
has operated, almost without check
of any kind, under the following
order from the House:
"RESOLVED. That the Chief
Clerk be and is hereby instructed
to purchase such supplies as are
necessary for expediting the busi-
ness of the House. including a copy
of the annotated statutes.
The new rules contemplated no
change in this condition and Mr..
Conley secured the adoption of an
amendment requiring the Chief
Clerk to get an itemized invoice in
triplicate of all supplies purchased
by him and file one with the State
Auditor for each bill paid. Mr..
Campbell's amendment was of the
same nature. It provides that no
bill for supplies shall be paid until
audited and approved by the Com
mittee on Legislative Expenses.
and requires this Committee to
keep a public record of its meet
ings.
These two important amendments
marked the first onslaught on the
new rules, and their option was
the first real victory won by the in
surgents.
Next came an honest concession
in reference to the concession
discussed last week. 1t will be re.
membered that the progressives in
sisted upon rule limiting the
time committees could hold bust.
ness from the House. The Commit.
tee on Rules conceded" this re.
form and reported a rule on the
subject which contained no less
than four jokers. as follows:
l. It was to apply only to bills.
emitting resolutions.
2. 1t Was INTERPRETED by good
parliamentarians to mean that it
would require a two-thirds vote
to force bill from a committee
within twenty days after it was re-
ferred.
3. 1t was not automatically
operative. but a bill could be
forced out five days after member
demanded it. if he made the de.
mand after the twenty day limit.
4. When a bill is forced out of
a committee. under this marvellous
rule. instead of taking It's regular
course. it shall Gle on the table"
which has little parliamentary ad-
vantage over being in a committee.
Knowing that w. A. Campbell
had an amendment ready and that
a general attack on Rule 20 was
pending. the Committee on Rules
themselves backfired by reporting
an amendment which removes jok-
er No. 2. This concession clearly
establishes the right Of a majority
to recall a bill from a committee at
any time and is of the greatest i'm
portance. Perhaps the progressives
will be satisfied with this. but the
other antiquities of the Rule 20
should be removed.
#
The third victory of the progress
sives was more clear cut and de-
cisive. It was undeniably due to
the power of publicity. The poll
ticians did not dare to face another
roll call on the question. Here is
the story.
After the amendment to the rules
requiring committees to keep a re-
cord of their actions had been de-
feated. 46 to 62-the vote was
given last week. w. I. Nolan
kept up the fight bv Offering the
following. which was of course re.
ferred to the Committee on Rules:
"RESOLVED. That each Com.
mittee of the House shall keep q
record of its meetings. which shall
include a roll call on all final action
on bills and the names Of members
present. Any member who is un.
able to attend a committee meeting
can have his reasons. for not being
present made a part of the record.
The record of all committee
meetings shall be filed for public