The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1913-10-02
DISADVANTAGE OR ADVANTAGE?

On Tuesday evening the Deseret
News, in it's leading editorial, pointed
out the partisan methods employed by
mittee between the two houses Of Con-
gress in putting the final touches
on that were placed upon the tariff bill
The News stated, as the fact is, that
the majority Of the committee met and
agreed on the changes desired without
consulting the minority at all, and
after they had agreed upon what they
wanted to do. and had agreed to do it,
they then presented the result Of their
agreement to the minority, which
promptly refused to sign the report
for the reason that they had not
been consulted about it. So far as
this is concerned, however, while it is
fair excuse, it Is not the real reason
why they failed to sign it. The mi
nority would not have signed it in any
event, because they are opposed radi-
cally to the changes which are made
in the tariff schedule
But the main point is, in so pro-
ceeding the minority proceeded in an
arbitrary. partisan manner, alike un-
fair to the country at large and dis.
courteous to their fellow members on
the committee. That sort of procedure
IS unfair to the country at large be-
cause legislation shaped in a one-sided
manner like this is not as perfect as
legislation would be where all con-
cerned in dealing with it have a fair
opportunity to express their opinions
and TO vote On the various propositions
1t was discourteous to the minority
members, because those members have
Just as much right to have their say
and to be present at all meetings where
the legislation is considered as have
the majority members.
This is one view Of the question, and
it is a view that is honest and fair.
There is another view, however,
which may be taken Of it, which is
executive and practical. In so acting,
the majority were able to consolidate
their strength and TO hold their mem
bers to the rule that the majority
must have its way, In a good many
Of the schedules it has appeared to be
a clear case that if the Democratic op-
position had been reinforced in the
committee considerations Of number
Of the schedules the Democratic ma
Jority might have been out-voted by
the Republican minority and the Demo
cratic minority joining against the
Democratic majority members. So as
a practical proposition, the Democrats
felt that they had to do as they did
in order to get on at all, with the as
surance that the will of the leaders
Of the party would be carried out.
Speaker Clark voiced this idea very
frankly on the floor OF the House.
when he insisted that the country did
not care whoop how legislation was
done or in what manner the House per-
fected and passed it. What the coup-
try wanted, as he claimed, is results.
How these results are brought about,
he declared, the country cared not.
In this view, and according to the
facts as given from day to day in the
dispatches, the Democrats were tacti-
cally justified in their partisan
methods and in barring the Republi- |
cans from all participation in the real
framing Of this legislation, as well as
its consideration in committee.
And here we have the two views. |
one sentimental, honest, and a lust |
view, which. would give the minority |
its equal right, which it certainly is
entitled to by law and under the tenure
of office; and the other view that the |
country expects the party in power to
nut throuah tho 1ao,eI,4;on - H.