April 13, 1911

l\lr . JAMES . I thought you ought to put that in your remarks so that your side might know that their own party reported this proposition in the Senate, which is identical to the one here offered now.

Mr. YOUNG of Michigan. . If tbe gentleman had been gi"dug his usual attention, he would have heard me say it .

Mr . J.A.l\IES . I do not think the gentleman was as clear as he usually is or I would not have drawn the deduction I did . i\fr. YOUNG of Michigan . Section 4 of Article I of tlle Constitution, paragraph 1, which it is proposed to amend, is in the following language :

The times, places, and manner of holding elections for Senators and Representatives . shall IJ.c prescribed in cuch State by the legislature thereof ; but the Congress may at any time by law make or alter such regulations, except as to the places of choosing Senators .

The effect of this amendment now proposed is to strike out the portion of the Constitution which gives to the Congress of the United States if it desires tlle right to regulate the election of Senators in tlle States, a power which has been held by the Congress of the United States since the formation of the Con ­ stitution and which at some future time it may be extremely necessary that it should exercise .

nfr. MARTIN of South Dakota . Will the gentleman yield? Tlle SPEAKER . Does the gentleman from M i chigan [Mr . Y ouNa] y i eld to the gentleman from South Dakota [l\:! r. l\Lrn ­

Mr . YOUNG of M i chigan . I do.

Mr . MARTIN of South Dakota . The ctieet of the adoption of the amendment in the form proposed in this resolution would be to create the c ondit i on b y which Congress would still have power to regulate the election pertaining to Members of the House and not of the Senate , would it not?

l\:fr . YOUNG of Michigan. . I wish to say that I do not know . And I have studied the language as far as I have had oppor ­ tunity to do so . I think it ·was undoubtedly the intention of the men who framed thl s provision to 1caye that power over the election of Representatives. . But I do n ot know whether they lrn.ve done it or no t.

~Jr . MARTIN of South Dakota. . It would certainly leave no power as to the election o.f Senators with Congress .

Mr . YOUNG of Michigan . .Absolutely none . If the words of the amendment to the Constitution which it is proposed to adopt a.re approved by a sufficient number of States, it would in terms take away tlic power even to regula.te tile election of Members of this House, and I nm not sure whether that is cured by tbc words of the resolution, which are as follows :

That in lleu of all of paragraph 1 of section 4, i n so far as the same relates to any authority in Congress to make o r alter regulations as to the time of holding elections for Senators -

Ancl so forth .

That is in the resolution . It is not in the amendment. The language of the amendment would apply to both , and i t is attempted to cure that by this ambiguous language .

Now, sir, nobody can foresee . the future . Nobody can tell how necessary it may be in the future in some State or States of this Union for Congress to have the power of regulating the election of Senators of the United States .

Mr . HAMILTON of Michigan . 1\Ir . Speaker -­

Tlle SPEAKER. Does the gentleman yield?

M r. YOUNG of Michigan. . I do .

Mr . HAMILTON of Michigan. . Mr . Speaker , I des i re to ask the gentleman if he has p r epared an amendment to cure this apparent defect?

Mr . YOUNG of Mi c h i gan . I sha ll o ti e r :.m runendment, n ow t hat the gentleman has suggested. it . I will d.o i t u t this point, and I will ask that it b e read a t the Clerk's desk and be co n­ sidered a.s pending .

The SPEAKER. The Clerk w ill repor t the a m endmen t.

The Clerk read as fo ll ows : . Amend by strik i ng out, on page 1, line 7, a ll afte . r th . e wor.d " vacan ­ cies" up to and including the word " Sen!ltors," in lme 10, a n d, on p2ge 2, by striking out all of lines O . 10, and 11.

The SPEAKER . The Clerk wiJl mnl'k that as " Amendment

Mr . KENDALL . Mr . Spoaker--

'l'he SPEAKER. Docs tile gentleman yielcl to the gentleman ~fr . YOUNG of Michigan . I yield .

JHr. KENDALL. Ilefore the gentleman proceeds further, I want to iuquire whether, if his amendment were uclopted, it would restore this resolution to llie condition it was in when it was -roted Ui 10 D in th.e Senate?

l\Ir. YOUNG of l\:Iicllign.n.. ~1bsolutely .

Now, :Mr . Speaker, 1 will ask le: : rrn to withdraw the amendment just offere<l arnl submit it in a little different form, recit ­ in g tbe lnng-nagc. nut it is of the sume effect.

tJ'l!c SPFdh."ER. The gentleman from Michigan withdraws his first amendment . '

:r.rr. YOUNG of :\Iichi~an . I ask that the modified amendment be read at tbe desk and considered .

The SPEAKER . The Glerk will report the amenclment .

The Clerk read as follows :

Amend as folloy;-s :

Strike out on page 1 the language beginning in line. 7, as follows : "And in lieu of all of paragraph 1 of section 4 of said .Article I, in so far as the sn.me relat es to any authority in Congress to 1:fiake ~or alter r eg-n lations as to the times or manner of holding- olect10ns ... or Senn.tors." · • o

.And strike out on page 2 the language beginnin~ m 1 me , us follows : ·

"The time:;, places, anll manner of holclin9 elections for .~enators shall be as prescribed in c:ich State by the legislature thereof.

l\Ir . CALDER. Tlmt makes it clear .

Mr . COOPER. 1\lr . Spcaker--

Tlle SPEAKER. Does the gentleman from Michigan yiel d to the gentleman from Wisconsin?

:Thlr . YOUNG of Michigun. I do .

M r. COOPER Mr . Speaker, I will ask the gentleman from Michigan if that is substantially willlt is lmown as the · Suther ­ land amendment?

Mr . YOUNG of Michigan . It is absolute1y the ~me as the Sutherland amendment.

Mr . KENDALL . Wili the gentleman y i eld for a. question?

Mr . YOUNG of Michigan. Yes .

l\I.r. KENDALL. . That would, preserve to the people the right to vote directly for a. Sena.tor , but it would retain in the Con ­ gross the a u thority to fix tlle time, place, and manner of elec ­ tion?

l\fr . Y O UNG of Michigan. No t the place, I should say . The time is excepted. .

M r. IlAR'l ' tETT . Mr . Speaker, will the gentleman yield? TJ.ie SPEAKER . Does the gentleman yield to the gentleman from Georgia? · i\Ir . YOUNG o f Michigan . I do .

l\Ir . BARTLETT . Does the gentleman think th.at the n..'llend ­ ment affects the right of the States to prescribe the qua1iflca ­ tion~ of voters who vote for United States Senators, and th.e administration of the laws relative to such election~, :mu the power to appoint officers to superintend tile election of United States Senators ; and will it not authorize Congress to authoriz-e uncl control the officers of the election of United Sb~ te::; Sena.­ tors, such ns clerks , United States marshals, un<l, other officers to supervise them? ?

Mr . Y O UNG o f M i ch i gan . I would not attempt, in the little time that I have for the consideration of this matter, to say just llow far the authority of Congress would go under tbat amendment, but I will say this to the gentleman, that it would be just exactly the same as it is to-day , that there would be no difference; that i t simply leaves in the Constitution a pro\·1 _ sion tt.nt is there now .

l\fr . BARTLETT . With reference to what-with reference to Representatives ?

Mr . YOUNG of Michigan. No; Representatives and Senators. 1\-lr . BARTLETT . Then, it is the purpose of this n.mendm~t. as I understand it, whether expressed in so many words or not, to vest in Congress, or, as the gentleman l.J.as put it, to Jen.ye in Congress, us he now construes the Constitution to mean, the full, exclusive, p l ena r y power to regulate everything with reference to the elect i on o f United States Senators .

M r. YOUNG of Mich i gan. It leaves the same power that we have nt present, n o more and no less ; the power under which this Government has ex i sted e ve r since th e Constitution was adopted .

Mr. BARTLETT. If the gentleman will permit another Mr. ADAIR question--

Mr . YOUNG of Michigan. Oh, yes.

Mr . BARTLE'l"l'. I am sorry my friend is not a little more frank about the matter . I do not charge him with not being sincere, but--

Mr. YOUNG of Michigan . Oh, if the gentleman's party friends had given us a little more time to consider this matter I might have been able to give a more complete answer to the gentleman from Georgia.

Mr . BARTLETT. If the gentleman "ill permit me, r want to say that I favor this resolution as it has been introduced; and I am sorry that the gentleman from :Michigan [Mr. YouNG] and his party associates on the committee and in the House have not all the time that they deem reasonably necessary. If J I had it in my power, on every important question I would give you full opportunity to amend and discuss; but 1 want to say to the House and to the gentleman, that if that amendment is adopted I think there are many of us who will under no cir

4-~ t f thi . 1 t' ' th th t d t 1 cumsw.nces vo e or . ~ reso u ion wi a ai;nen men upon •

Mr . YOUNG of Michigan .. I am not surprised a~ the statement of the gentleman .. It discloses a state of a.ffairs . which I had suspected, that .there are some gentlemen m this House who are not m favor of the election of Senators by the people, and :yet, w~~ ~ill vote for this proposition if they can have combined with it the other proposition, to leave it absolutely m the power of a corrupt State to defeat the will of ~he people and to defeat the will of t111s body, while the American Congress stands by utterly helpless. [Applause on the Republican side.] Now, l\lr. Speaker, I wish to say--

Mr. SLAYDEN . Mr . Speaker-­

The SPEAKER. Does the gentleman from Michigan yield to the gentleman from Texas? · l\lr . YOUNG of Michigan. I will yield . to my friend from Texas.

Mr. SLAYDEN. I should like to inquire where, in the opin ion of the gentleman, these corrupt .States are?

Mr . YOUNG of Michigan. Many States at times have been corrupt.

Mr . SLAYDEN . Shake not your gory locks at us . You ca.n not find them in the South .

Mr. YOUNG of Michigan . It has been charged by southern gentlemen at times.

Mr . CLAYTON . Some of the Southern States were corruptly governed during the reconstruction period by the Republican Party and carpetbaggers and scalawags put in charge of the State governments of the South by the Republican Party, [Applause on the Democratic side.]

l\lr . YOUNG of Michigan . I do not care to be drawn into all of these side issues, but I wish to say just one word about the manner in which this resolution appears here; and I want to say, in the first place, that I do not cast any reflection of unfairness upon the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. RUCKER]; the chairman of this committee, or his party colleagues, but I do think they have acted with undue haste in forcing this important matter before this body with so little chance to consider it. Of course I do not think that this body needs much time to consider the principal proposition, the election of Senators by the people, but it does need time to consider the language which shall be written into the Constitution of the United States to endure, perhaps, for ages. This Committee on the Election of President and Vice President was appointed day before yesterday in the afternoon . That evening the gentleman from Missouri sent out notices for a meeting the next morning at 10 o'clock. Many gentlemen, like myself, had public business in the departments that morning, and we did not reach our committee room until after this meeting had been held. The gentleman from New York [1\Ir. DANFORTII], a member of the minority, reached there a few minutes before the committee concluded its proceedings.

I charge no bad faith, I charge no attempt to prevent the minority's being present, but the effect of it all was that the matter was not considered by either side of the House with any degree of care, and if it had been, I do not believe the resolution would have come in here with such crudities of language in it as appear in many instances. . I hope that the gentlemen on the other side of the House will forego their desire to take from the Congress of the United States the power, in any event, to regulate the election of Senators, that they will permit this amendment to be adopted and the resolution, substantially as introduced except in that respect, to pass. [Applause.] I reserve the balance of my time . ·

Mr. RUOKER of Mi ss ouri. Mr. Speaker, I yield. to the gentleman from Indian~ [:Mr . ADAIR].

Mr. Speaker, as long as I have a voice and vote in this House I shall stand for all reforms demanded by the patriotic and intelligent voters of the country . During my four years of service in this body I have consistently and vcrsistently fought all forms of special privilege intended to benefit the few at the expense of the many . I have vigorously OTl!'lOSed all propositions to raid the Government Treasury by the granting of subsidies and haYc insisted upon an economical administration of the affairs of government to the end that the burdens of the people may be lightened . ·

The country is. to be congratulated up on the fact that tl~e present Democratic membership of the House stands as a u:i;itt against the . evils I have enumerated and has already shown i~s good m~ent10ns and devotion to the people and t.o tlle country by cutting do.~ the expenses . of the House over $182,000 ger year' and this is but a drop m the bucket as compared ~Ith what we will ... aye the people when the vn.r10us dep~rtme~t! of government are placed on a business basis. We are - g~mb to practice what we preach by reducing the cost of government •t to its actual needs.

And now we come to another great reform-the election of United States Senators by a direct vote of the people.

Mr. Speaker, I introduced n joint resolution in the Sixtieth Congress, reintroduced it in the Sixty-first Congress, and again introduced it on the first day of this session proposing an amendment to the Constitution providing for the election of Senators of the United States by a direct vote of the people . The resolution is as follows: Joint resolution (H. J . Res . 20) proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States proYiding for the election of Senators of the United States.

Resolved by tlw Sc1rnte and House of Representatives of the United States of Amc1·ica in Congress assemulcd (tu;o-thirus of each Hous e concurri11g therein), That the following amendments . be proposed to the lefo-islatures of the several States, which, when ratified by three-fourths o said le gislatures, shall become and be a part of the Constitution, namely: In lieu of the first and second paragraphs of sect ion 3 of Article I of the Constitution of the United States of America the following shall be prtJposed as an amendment to the Constitution:

" Sec. 3. That the Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, who shall be elected b:v a direct votr: of the people thereof for a term of s ix years, and each Senator shall have one vote; a plurality of the votes cast for candidates for Senator sha ll elect, and the electors shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislature.

When vacancies happen, by resignation or otherwise, in the repre · sentation of any State in the Senate the same shall be filled for the unexpired term thereof in the same manner as iR provided for the election of Senators in paragraph one: Provided, That the executive thereof shall make temporary appointment until the next general or special election, held in accordance with the statutes or constitution of such State.

"This amendment shall ntJt be so construed as to affect the election or term of any Senator chosen before it becomes valid as a part of the Constitution."

l\Ir . Speaker, this joint resolution shows where I have stood for several years on this great and important question . I am one of those who believe tlle p · people can be trusted, and the closer the relationship between tl.le Government and the people the better it will be for all concerned. In my judgment the nearer a governmental agency is to the source of power the greater will be its value, probity, and efficiency . . Direct responsibility results in honesty, and good fnitll sustains the wa>ering, lends encouragement to the timid, and exposes and defeats the unworthy, incompetent, and corrupt. The tendency of government the world over is toward tlle people. The mo1e ­ ment is gradual, but continuous and persistent; there has been no backward step ; no retrogression or recession. Without llaste or thought of reh·acing our steps we have moved forward in tbe direction of liberty and the closer relationship between tllo people and the Government .

l\fr . Speaker, the resolution before the House is one of great importance . It is a long step in the right direction, and wlleu enacted into law the will of the people will be supreme in the United S _ States Senate . Wealth, plutocracy, and subservienc y to the interests will no longer be tlle qualifications necessary for a Senator, but rugged honesty, recognized ability, admitted capacity, and wide experience will be required of those who occupy a seat in the highest lawmaking body of the land . I know, Mr. Speaker, there are some who style themselves as "watch dogs" of the Constitution, who come forward with a storm of condemnation whenever it is proposed to amend that document. I am free to confess that in my llnmb1e judgment no instrument in the history of the world compares with the Constitution of the United States, but Article V of the Constitution gives Congress the power of amendment, and this right has been exercised time and again as the exigencies demnnded.

Both time and experience have shown that as n whole the Constitution is good and wise and the people have given it their heartiest approval; but devotion to the instrument itself should prompt us to make such changes as will insure to the people the greatest degree of liberty. When those who formed this Government looked over the world they saw nothing but arbitrary governments; a monarchial form of government prevailed everywhere. Their experiment was great and grand, yet it was hazardous. They were determined, howeYer, to form a government of the people. Some of them, realizing the splendid ability and the vast capacity of the American people for selfgoyernment, were willing to lay aside all of the shackles and forms of arbitrary government, but there were others who had less faith in the people for self-government and insisted on retaining some of the influences and agencies peculiar to a monarchical form of government. I believe experience has taught us that such agencies can safely be dispensed with and that we can with perfect safety bring the Government closer to the people by allowing them to vote direct for United States Senators.

Mr. Speaker, the present method of electing Senators has senting voice. made the United States Senate the home of many men of great wealth, whose hearts do not beat in sympathy with the interests of the plain people and who never would have occupied a seat in that body if their election had been left to a direct vote of the people. We have reached a time in the history of the country when the Senate is no l _ longer looked upon as the safe, conservative body, the so-called balance wheel, but is looked upon with dread and apprehension by the average .American citizen, while the House, with all its faults and uncertainties, is regarded as tlle representative body of the American people, where can be heard the voice of the average citizen and where his rights will l>e protected and enforced. This condition is due to the fact that legislatures are frequently invaded by men of great wealth, shrewdness, and audacity, and .the rights of the people , give way to the exactions of corporate power; and he who can serve the corporations by controlling a legislature, through intrigue or persuasion, is regarded as fully equipped for service as a Senator, in which position he can guard and protect the interests of the corporation he serves. In this way the standard for the exalted position of United States Senator is debased by corporate influence. The wirepuller and the schemer are frequently preferred to the statesman and the patriot, and the proud title of United States Senator has lost much of its power in the suspicions which rest in the public mind as to the manner and conditions of their selection.

Mr. Speaker, when Senators are elected by the people there will be no legislative deadlocks, which in the past have not only resulted in scandal, but have frequently deprived certain States of an equal representation in this body. The Constitution provides that each State shall be entitled to two Senators, but during the past 20 years there has scarcely· been a time when one or more States were not tied up in a deadlock over the election of a Senator, and therefore were deprived of their fair and equal representation. This was an injustice to the State and unfair to the whole country.

The present system has had an evil effect on the election of members of the legislatures. The two seats in the United States Senate for each State are highly coveted prizes in American public life, and as long as legislatures choose our Senators, those who covet these prizes will make it their business to choose members of the legislatures, and in this way much corruption and fraud will creep into our public life.

It has been said by another that tl.le United States Senate of to-day may be likened unto the Roman senate of old. Rome, at the zenith of her power, boasted of the learning of her senators, which has been handed down to posterity and forms to-day the masterwork of the Latin tongue. But her senate · became the goal of those who bought their seats with their gold, thus driving out the men whose brilliancy shone in brains alone; their laws began to decline; the people lost their virility; they lost their manhood and they lost Rome. Money is forever the same. Its one inherent quality in the social universe is cohesion. Its power wherever exercised is proportionate to its mass. Separated from tlle individuality of its owner it becomes a menace to the body politic, the destroyer of social equality and the creator of caste. The immortal Lincoln, with keen insight, foresaw the future of the United States Senate when he prophetically admonished his countrymen to "beware of the money power which seeks to perpetuate its reign until the wealth of the country bas passed into the hands of the few and the Nation is lost."

Mr. Speaker, I belie1e the only way to remedy these evils is to so change the Constitution that the people may vote direct for Senators the same as they now vote for Members of the House. Every l\Iember of Congress who believes in a · republican form of goyernment, a go-vernment by the people and for the people, and who is in favor of preserving the sovereignty in the hands of the citizens will vote for this resolution. Its auop. tion will bring the Government closer to the people, will preyent corruption and scandal in State legislatures, will lessen the temptation of political parties to gerrymander legislatiYe districts for partisan purposes, and will make United States Senators directly responsible to the· individual citizen. We have recently passed a resolution providing for a great exposition to be held in the city of San Francisco to celebrate the completion of the Panama Canal, to which we have invited the nations of the world. How fitting it would be to signalize it by the submission and adoption of this amendment to the Constitution, thus publishing to the world that the greatest Republic on earth has gi1en to its people direct control of the legislative department of Go1ernment.

Mr. Speaker, I hope this resolution will pass without a dis­

Mr. RUCKER of Missouri. I now yield 15 minutes to my colleague on the committee [Mr. HOBSON].

Mr. HOBSON. Mr. Speaker, replying to the gentleman from Michigan [l\Ir. YOUNG], who has just spoken, and to his criticism of haste on the part of the committee, I wish, as a. member of the committee, to state, as doubtless the chairman will later state at some length, that the question of consideration of this measure was taken up by the committee, and it was the unanimous view of the members present at yesterday's meeting, in· eluding members of the minority, that there would be no prcju· dice, no undue haste, in its consideration at yesterday's meeting, and in taking a vote at the same meeting. In view of the absence of several members, including the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. YouNG], it was agreed by unanimous consent that though the vote of absent members would not affect the vote of the committee, they would be given the right to ·rnte on the question and be so recorded by the committee.

CIVIL GOVERNMENT EVOLVED FROM MILITARY ORGANIZATION,

Mr. Speaker, this question involves the organic law of this land. .America is the only country where there is, strictly speaking, constitutional or organic law. History shows that governments grew out of military organizations that were created primarily for the purpose of a better self-defense. They started when families in the face of common enemies stopped their own quarrels and organized clans. Out of these military organizations clan governments were formed. When clans, confronted- by a common danger, submerged their differences and formed tribes, the larger military organization gave birth to tribal government, When great warring tribes, confronted by a common danger, united and formed nations, the still larger military organizations gave birth to the great monarchical governments of to-day.

Growing out of military systems the olcler goyernments of the world :ue patterned on military lines.

Anyone familiar with a military organization knows that power to be effective must be concentrated, must be lodged in a supreme head, whose authority is transmitted downward in gra<lunl stages until it reaches the rank and file of the army. In this way every government of history, including the government from which ours sprang, originally lougcd authority in a supreme head and in a hierarchy of nobility, practically excluding the masses of the people from dril ns from military authority. The rulers, being human, and holding the power, naturally adopted the hereditary principle for its transmission an<l . perpetuation. EVOLUTIONARY TRANSFER OF AUTIIOlllTY FRO:\l RULERS TO TIIE PEOPLE. When self-defense and war rame to occupy not all but only a part of the thought of the Nation, the military principle in government began to yield to a growing demand of the people for a share in civil authority. .As the normal condition of society steadily became more one of peace and less one of war the necessity for centralization of power steadily declined, and the demand of the people for participation in goyernment steadily grew and gradually overcame the opposition of hereditary rulers, reluctant to part with power. It can be stated broadly that tlle progress of civil government has been a steady ernlution of decentralization-the slow but steady passing down of authority from . rulers to the people.

The fact of fundamental importance for us to remember at this juncture is that, in spite of setbacks due to revolutionary excesses in particular case~, the results have been beneficent, tending toward the progress of the world. The question for us to determine in passing upon this resolution is simply whether its provisions are revolutionary or evolutionary. If they are . evolutionary, then the light of all history shows that they are wise and should be adopted.

TIIll COXSTITUTIO:N' AN EVOLUTION.

The fastest evolution has taken place in Anglo-Saxon lands, where the monarch and the nobility have been shorn of most of their power . .At the time that our Government was founded a co nvic tion had crystallized in the Anglo-Saxon world that the . supreme civil imwcr could be lodged safely in the hands of the people th~mselvcs [applause]; and when this Union was est ab1is hec1, the supreme power of the land was lodged in the people and expressed in their organic law . As great as was the forward step in the adoption of the Constitution, it was evolutionary and not re-volutionary, for our fathers in their wis tlom fully realized the limitations and weaknesses of human nature, and the difficulties and cln.ngers that naturally beset the practical operations of decentralized, popular government Th e very organic instrument that lodged supreme power in the hands of the people provided in its practical operation for a double s.ystem of restraints, the restraints of subdilision, and the restraints ~f representatirn agents .

OUllS A GOVEn"N"M.E!'.->r OF RESTRAINTS .

The two great divisions of authority are the individual States and the United States. The authority lodged in the people of indiYidual States and in their governments constitutes a fundamental balance and check upon the exercise of the powers lodged in foe Federal Government.

The powers of the Federal Government and, indeed, of all the State governments are further subdivided into three coordinate branches-legislative, judicial, executive . The legisla.ti..,..e branch is still further divided into two houses, .an upper and a lower house .

Restraint through the employment of representative agents is as largely developed as restraints through subdivision . All of the actual operations of government, as provided in the Constitution, are carried on through representative agents, and mo st of the operations are in the hands of agents chosen by ag c~1ts . In only one house of one branch, the lower house of tile legislative branch, . are the agents chosen by the people themselves. Under the Constitution the upper house of the legislative branch and the executive brunch are two degrees remo\ed from the people, while the judicial branch is three degre es removed from the people.

With such a combined system of checks and restraints the Constitution of the United States in vesting the supreme power in the people and even permitting universal or manhood suffrage was only a step in evolution, and not a matter of revolution in Anglo-Sa::s::on institutions.

UIITOLUTIO:N' IhlPOSSIIlLE IN AMERICA ,

In providing for changes or amendments the Constitution contempla.ted further evolution, and in the method of amending, the restraints and ~afeguards n.re so developed that violent and revolutionary changes are practically impossible .

In the evolutionary development of nearly a century and a quarter there has been no fundamental change in the system of subdivision of powers either between the Federal Govern- ­ ment and the State governments or between the branches of the Federal Government or the branches of government in any State. The Federal Government is exercising its powers more and more and is entering fields that appear new, but in reality no new powers han~ been assumed. '£here is at times talk of usur pati on of power on the part of one branch of the Government, but in reality no organic change or practice has taken place.

EVOLUTION IlESTUICTED.

Evolutionary development has been confined. and is now confined to extending the control of the people over representative agents . The first development was in the assumption of power to vote for the Executive, bringing this branch of government dO'\YU to one degree instead of two degrees removed. It 111'..1st !Jc remembered, however, that though the people vote substantially for Presidents, the candidates are still chosen by conycntions, or are mo degrees removed, though individual States, A.lnb:una first, and now Oregon, are giving the people opportunity to vote on their choice of candidates for the Presidency. This crn lu tionr..ry development has been long in use, though without formal amendment to the Constitution, and its e.trects ha n.~ been b~n::ficbl. Th e right to vote directly on.. candiclntes for tJJ.2 Presldency wlll doubtless be extended to all the States . Tte proposition now is to bring down the election of Sena.tors to <'l direct Yote, making these representative agents one degree im;te:1 d of two degrees removed froli'.l the people.

DIIlECT ELECTIOX OF SEXATORS on:nnUE .

The power to do this has already been assumed by the people in many of the indivillu::i.l State s, and the experience in each case has con.firmed the conviction, which is now almost universal, that it should · be extended in a formal way to all the States . Such an amendment is clearly n :J tep in the e1olution of government; the time is clearly more than ripe for the step to be taken. There is no tinge of revolution in the proposition . The results could only be advantageous . It would be the part of wisdom for this amendment to be adopted and the people to be gi1en this added control of elections.

I realize that men have always differed as to the part that the people should take in the affairs of government, and that this difference lies at the foundation of all party governments . One temperament, one type of mind, has more confidence in the masses of the people than the other type of mind . One type wants the Go-vernment conserved more as it hns been . and that type forms the basis for the conservative party in every nation. 'rhe other type of mind wants the Government brought down more rapidly to the people; it is more liberal in its confidence in the people, and that type forms the basis for the liberal party in every go-vcrnment. There may be changes of the names, there may be many parties springing up for particular purposes at particular times , but in the long evolution of government in all countries where there is a conception of populnr goyernment this will be the fundamental dividing line between the two great parties.

ONLY UE.A.CTIO:N'.ARIES CAN OPPOSE MEASUUI'l.

The time is so ripe for this step-the election of Senators by direct vote of the people-it has been so thoroughly considered a11d so widely tried out in individual States; it is such a comparatively short step and so in keeping with the manifest evolution of our institutions tll:it even the conservative element in our midst can freely accept it without misgi-ving. Only men of reactionary temperament can harbor misgivings .

It should be borne in mind that the amendment would hav e no effect upon the division of powers between the Fed.em.I Gov ­ ernment and the individual States . It takes from the Federal Government no power granted by the Constitution; it takes from the States no power reserved by the Constitution . It al ­ ters not the balance of power us between large and small Stutes, maintainin · g the equality of suffrage in the Senate, nor does it tend to any such disturbance, for Article V of the Constitution puts it beyond the reach of any amendment to reduce this equal suffrage for any State, large or small, without the con.sent of the State . Furthermore, the amendment does not alter the division of powers between the three coordinate branches of the Go1ernmcnt . It only affects one form of the legislative brunch, and the whole change in the legislative branch would not relatively be as great as the change in the executive branch by the direct yoting of the people for the Presidents, which change has proved beneficial . The powers of the Senate remain unchanged ; tlrn term of office of Senators remains unchanged.

Some timid minds may have misgivings that the amencl.ment would remove restraint upon the action of the lower House, needed to prevent hasty or retolutionary legislation in times of popular passion or enthusiasm.

• rnACTICAL EFFECT .

Now, follow the course of a measure consiclcroo revolution._ ury, originating in this House in the midst of n great wnYe of populur enthusiasm . After passing this House it would go to the Senate . Two-thirds, nt len.st, of the Senn.tors would hnve been elected n.t times prior to the election of the Representatives onc-thircl two years prior, and one-third four years prior , which would antedate the wave of enthusiusm; moreoyer, onethir<1 of the Senators would hnvc terms extending two years beyond the terms of the Representatives, nnd one-third four years beyond. The Senate woulcl still exercise the restraining function of a second branch a.nd would still be n conservative secon<l branch.

Ifot cyen if such a measure pn.ssed both Houses of the Iegis1ntiYe branch it would promptly come upon the check of the executive branch, with the ...,..eto power . If it should get beyond this obstncle and be placc<l on the statute books it would be subject to review by the Supreme Court. whose memhcrs arc farthest remoYed from the influence of public clamor, holding tbcli:, offices for life, and n11pointccl by Prcsiclents extending back oYer a long period. This Supreme Court would put the statute up to the test of the Constitution, and since this amendment does not affect the methods of amending the Constitution, and since thcs-e methods make hasty ancl revolutionary amendments almost impossible, it mny be sniu that the proposed amendment still leaves it n.lmo::;t impossible to adopt revolutionary measures in our country . In fact, measures clearly in line with public policy, conservative cb.nnges recognized almost universally as ndyi:-ahle, find the inllcrcnt impe<1iments in the wny of coustitutionnl amendment nlrnost insurmountable. But for these im11ediments, the election of Senators by direct ....-otc of the people would have been in opera ­ tion for the last twenty years .

EVOLUTION PREVENTS REVOLUTION.

The difficulties, obstacles, checks, and restraints upon progressive changes in our Government are many fold greater than in the English Government. It is the Slowness of response of the various representative · agents, one and two degrees removed from the people, to the justified demands for progressive measures, that is causing tlie rapid growth of the movement for the initiative, referendum, and recall. Further failure to meet the growing demand for this movement will cause an inevitable growth of socialism. When evolutionary changes overdue are long withheld, then revolutionary measures grow in strength. Let not those who believe in representative government think they should oppose all changes. Further postponing the legitimate evolutionary step in the development of representative government as proposed in this resolution must inevitably discredit all representative government

The SPEAKER. The time of the gentleman from Alabama has expired.

Mr. HOBSON. I will ask the gentleman from Missouri if I may have five minutes more?

Mr. RUCKER of Missouri. I yield to the gentleman five minutes additional.

PUBLIC CONFIDENCE IN SENATE SHAKEN.

11-fr. HOBSON. It is no partisan spirit that constrains me to point out that the holding of power so long by one party has dammed up the stream of evolution until the waters of reform are overflowing. It is wiser to open the gate than to endanger the mill. In the blocking of legitimate reform, no agent has been more effective than the United States Senate. This very resolution is a good illustration. Thirty-one State legislatures have acted favorably, the House of Representatives has passed a similar resolution time and again, both great political parties have made it a part of their platforms, and yet the Senate still IJlocks the Wfly. It is not overstating the situation to say that public confidence in the Senate has been seriously shaken and the most serious blows to public confidence have come through the present method of choosing Senators by the legislatures.

!'RESENT METHOD INVITES CORRUPTION.

It can not be denied that the method of election by the small number who compose a legislature invites corruption from great moneyed interests seeking to secure or to hold unmolested the power to tax the American people by controlling the United States Senate, and invites corruption from men of great wealth seeking a similar power or seeking the honor and prestige of the office.

Nothing would so restore public confidence in the Senate as the adoption of this resolution, giving the election over into the hands of the people. It is high time to restore this confidence of the people if we would check the formidable growth of socialism in the land.

WOULD PROMOTE EFFICIEXCY OF STATE LEGISLATURES.

It must be further admitted that the present method of election of Senators hns been accompanied by an ever increasing frequency of demoralization in the State legislatures. Placing the election o~ Senators in the hands of the people would really restore to the people of the State's a better control over their own legislatures; it would raise the standard of State legislators and turn the attention of the legislatures to the needs of the States. The passage of this resolution would thus profoundly promote the highest efficiency of both the Federal and the State Governments. ·

WOULD PROMOTE POLITICAL EDUCATION OF PEOPLE.

But even promoting efficiency in both of our divisions of Government, State and national, does not measure the full benefits of this reform. The greatest benefit of all lies in the fact that it would contribute fundamentally to the political and patriotic development of the people themselves. The great law of development is recurring exercise of the activities. The glory of free institutions and self-government is the developruent of the people through the exercise of the functions of government. It is wise even to go faster than the highest efficiency of the machinery of government · would dictate, so that the people in making mistakes would learn from them and rise to higher planes.

The SPEAKER. The time of the gentleman has again expired.

l\fr. HOBSON. Would it be imposing to ask the chairman for three minutes more, Mr. Speaker?

Mr. RUCKER of Missouri. I do not believe I can give the gentleman that much time, but I will yield him one minute more.

Mr. HOBSON. Mr. Speaker, the action called for by this resolution is evo1ntion. U we - are wise we will not dam it up. The current of evolution dammed up too long brings the flood of revolution. This reform is now overdue. Its delay has contributed to abuses and has shaken the confidence of the American people. The passage of this resolution is demanded by the highest considerations of efficiency of government, by the hi"ghest considerations of the welfare of the people, by the highest considerations of the orderly evolution of free institutions. The people realize this. They want this reform. They are entitled to it. I am heartily in favor of it.

The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Alabama asks unanimous consent to extend his remarks in the RECORD. Is there objection? [After a pause.] The Chair hears none.

1'he Chair asks the indulgence of the House for a minute. On the question arising this morning, whether an amendment was in order in general debate in the House, the Chair mixed up the rule in the House with the one in the Committee of the Whole, and the Chair asks leave to change the ruling in conformity with the rule, as suggested by the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. MANN]. Whenever the present occupant of the chair makes a mistake and it is called to his notice, he will correct it as swiftly as he made the mistake. [Applause.] Is there objection? [After a pause.] The Chair hears none.

Mr. YOUNG of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I yield five minutes to the gentleman from Vermont [Mr. FOSTER].

Mr. FOSTER of . Vermont. . Mr. Speaker, I am in favor of the popular election of United States Senators, and so I shall vote for this resolution submitting to the States an amendment to the Constitution providing therefor. I wish we might have had a lnrger opportunity to consider whether some amendment could not wisely be made to it. It seems to me, for instance, that the proposed amendment should provide that the regular election of Senators shall occur at the regular State election to be held next before the vacancy occurs which is to be filled.

Mr. HARDWICK. Will the gentleman let me interrupt him?

Mr. FOSTER of Vermont. Certainly.

Mr. HARDWICK. Under the language of this amendment the legislature could do that if it wanted to do so.