April 13, 1911

Mr . YOUNG of Michigan . I now yield, Mr . Speaker, 5 minutes to the gentleman from Wyoming [Mr. 1\foNDELL].

Mr. MO .i: ffiELL. Mr . Speaker, I lillve no question of the wisdom of the fn thcrs in making the provision they did in regard to the election of United States Senators. They had not learned, as we have learned, how dependable and safe is an educated democracy. Furthermore, they did not have in those days the widespread opportunities of education, the high average of intelligence. and the widely diffused knowledge of goT'­ ernmental affairs that the people have at this time . Furthermore, times ha \e changed, and conditions confronting and surrounding us are vastly different from what they were at the time the Constitution was adopted.

The people generally throughout the country have come to the conclusion that it is better to elect Senators by direct vote. So widespread is this fe e ling that in at least 27 States provisions base been made intending, so far as it is possible to do so under the Constitution, to provide for a direct expression of pired? the people in the election of Senators. Even though - gh I did not believe, as I do believe, that the Senators should be elected by a direct vote of the people, I should believe it and hold it my duty to vote for a resolution to give the people of the States an opportunity to express their opinion on that question; but, Mr. Speaker, we are unfortunate in the form of the resolution now before us. It is, in my opinion, faulty in two essential respects. The demand has been for the election of Senators by a direct .Mr. YOUNG vote of the people.

The resolution before us does not contain a provision specifically providing for the · election of Senators by a direct vote of the people, and I am not certain that the courts might not hold that the language used in the resolution would authorize the election of Senators through some intermediary body. Second, there has been interjected into this resolution a provision amending section 4 of Article I, entirely foreign to the question which has been so widely agitated among the people, taking from the Congress of the United States . supervision and control over the election of Senators, and probably over the election of Representatives in Congress. There has been no demand at any time among the people of the country for o.' constitutional change of this character . "No party platform has ever demanded it, and, in my opinion, it is not desired by the people. In order to meet these objections I shall offer in my time a substitute for the resolution now before the House, said substitute being in the form of the resolution introduced by the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. LLOYD] in the last Congress and reported to the House. That resolution provides clearly ancl specifically for the election of Senators by a direct vote of the people. That resolution does not relate or refer to section 4 of Article I , and it presents in a concrete form and in simple language for the consideration of the people of the country the great question which has been so widely discussed .for su c h a length of time, , to wit, Shall Senators of the United States be elected by a direct vote of the people?

l\Ir. POWERS. l\Ir. Speaker--

The SPEAKER. Do e s the gentleman yield!

l\Ir. MO:NDELL. I yield for a question .

Mr. POW E RS. Section 4 of Article I of the Constitution now provides that-

Tl.J. e times, , places, and manner of holding elections for Senators and R e pre se ntativ es shall be prescribed in each State by the legislature thereof but the Congress may at any time by law make or alter such r egu lations, 1 e xc e pt a s to the places of choosing Senator s .

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

Mr. YOUNG of Michigan. I yield the gentleman one minute more.

Mr. POWERS. I 1.md not completed my question.

1\Ir. MO:NDELL. What was the gentleman's question?

Mr . POWERS . I would like to know in what instance Congress has ever felt it necessary to interfere with the time, manner, and so forth, of holding elections as prescribed by the Consti t ution?

Mr. MONDELL. Mr. Speaker, it clocs not occur to me that it is important to inquire wheth e r Congress has ever thought it neces s ary to exercise this authority, thou g h, in fact, it has done so. The important thing about it is tlint it is a part of the fundamental law of the land. Tll ere has been no general de mand for its repeal or its am en clment. There has been no debate anywhere or discu ss i o n b y th e people in favor of a change or amendment to that proYi s i on of the Constitution. The time may come when it is of th e u t mo st importance that Congress shall exercise this power, and certainly the majority, if it is acting in good faith, ought not, in presenting this proposition on which we are generally a g reed, insist on coupling it with another and entirely diff e rent matter, in regard to which there is a wide difference of opinion. I shall vote for the s ubstitute I have offered; if that is defeated, I shall vote for the amendment of the gentleman from Michigan [l\lr. YouNa] ; and if that is defeated, I shall vote for the resolution; not that I think it should pass in that form, but because I expect it to be amended in the Senate .

Mr. Speaker, I offer as a substitute this re s olution, which I send to the Clerk's desk.

The SPEAKER. The time of the gentleman has expired . The Clerk will read the substitute.

The Clerk proceeded to read the resolution.

Mr. JAl\IES (interrupting the reading) . .l\ir. Speaker, I make the point of order that if the ' amendment is to be read it must be read in the time of the gentleman who offe,red it, or in the time of that side of the House.

The SPEAKER. It is being read in that time.

Mr . JAMES. I thought the time of the gentleman had ex­

The SPEAKER. The time of the gentleman had expired, but the gentleman had the resolution in his hand ready to send to the Clerk's desk, and I thought it was only fair to have it read.

Mr . JAMES . I agree with tile Chair tlrnt it is fair; but it is equally fair that it should be taken out of somebody's time.

The SPEAKER. It will be taken out of the time of the ~cntlcman from Michigan. of Michigan. If the gentl e man in s ists, I wlll yield more time .

The SPEAKER . The Clerk will rea<l.

The Clerk proceeclcd with and concluded the reading of the substitute, as follows:

Strike out all after the resolving clau s e nnu ins e rt th e following: “That the following amendment he propo se d to the legislatur e s of the several States, which. when ratified by tl.J.r ee -fom·th s of said l e gislatur e s, shall become and be a part of the Constitution, namely : In li e u of the first and second paragraphs of section 3 of Article I of tho Constitution of the United States of America, th e following shall be proposed ns an amendment to the Constitution:

" ' SEC. 3 . That the Senate of the Unit e d S tate s shall be compo s ed of two Senators from each State, who shall be el e cted by a direct vote of the people thereof for n term of six years, anu each Sena.tor s hall ham one vote; a plurality of the votes cast for candidates for Senator shall elect, and the electors shall have the qualification s requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State legi s lature.

" 'When vacancies happen, by resignation or otherwise, , in the representation of any State in the Senate, the sam e s hall bo filled for the unexpired term thereof in the same manner as is provided for the election of Senators in paragraph 1 : Pro,,;i d ccl , That the executive thereof shall make temporary appointm e nt until the n ex t general or special election, held in accordance with the statut e s or constitution of such State.'

" This amendment shall not 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 . YOUNG of Michigan. Mr . Speaker, I yield five minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts [l\fr. l\fcCALL].

Mr. McCALL. Mr. Speaker, it is no light thing to amend the Constitution of the United States. That is legi s lative work which no body of men is capable of performing offhand. I <lo not think that wo should try to improvise substitutes for the different articles now contained in our organic law. Gentlemen will remember the amendment that was hastily put through the two House · s of Congress less than two years ago to impo s e an income tax, and there is one thing about that amendment, about its form, that has given better ground for opposition than everything pertaining to its substance, and that is that the amendm e nt was so sweeping in character that it gave to the Federal Government in terms the power to tax the incomes derived from S tate bonds and from municipal bonds and from the other instrumentalities of local government, and, as we know, it has been held that the power to tax is the power to destroy, we conferred by that amendment in terms the power to the National Government to wipe out of existence any local government of the country. I regret, therefore, that this amendment should not have been more carefully considered and that there should not have been time given to the Members of the House to read the report and to study the form in which it is presented and to determine whether they should ·rnte for it or not Now, :Mr. Speaker, I do not sec any objection to ha v ing the people of the different States elect their repr e sentatives in the Senate precisely in the same way as they el e ct their govern.ors or as they elect th e ir Members of this House . I am in favor of that proposition, notwithstanding the fact that the old system has generally work e d well, and. notwithstanding that the application of the new system in some States has not invariably worked well. For years the legislatures performed their functions a good deal in the way it was intended the electors for President should perform their function~, ancl . they: sent a fine body of men to the United States Senate; but, under: tlie pressure of modern conditions, after men had accumulated great wealth, a new era was brought in and tlle system did not work uniformly so well. We elect a legislature; that legislature is chosen for tlle purpose of enacting laws to govern the State.

It is not chosen primarily for the purpose of electing the men to represent the State in tlle Sena.te, and the result is that tlle members of that legislature are turned over to intrigue and earboring, and nobody knows what other arts in order to influence their judgment. I believe it would be more open, it would be better, that we should have better popular government if the people should vote directly for their Senators. Now, that tlrnt system has not worked well in some of the States, in my opinion, is due to the conditions of some of the States' primary laws. State primary laws may be good things, but a State primary law that permits the members of one party to enter the caucus of the other party and dictate its nominees is nothing but a low swindle upon representative party govern- ment. [Applause.] Now, l\Ir. Speaker, there is one part of this proposed amendment that I very much object to, and I object to it so strongly that I shall vote against the whole proposition if it remains in the resolution. It is proposed to take from the National Government the supervisory power that the framers of the Constitution put there and that it should have. No matter if it has been a sleeping power up to this time, it may sometime be a power that is vital to the preservation almost of the Republic. It proposes to take away from the National Government the supervisory power that i . t has over the electing of the members of tlle great political department of the Government. You destroy the symmetry of the instrument by permitting that, and providing, or permitting it may provide, that these regnlntions concerning the Members of this Honse--

The SPEAKER. The time of the gentleman from Massa- I chusetts has expired.

Mr. McCALL. Then, Mr. Speaker, I will have to content myself.

l\fr. YOUNG of Michigan. I hope the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. RUCKER] will use some of his time now .

l\'Jr. RUCKER of Missouri. The gentleman llns more time than I have.

Mr. YOUNG of Michigan. Then I will yield--

Mr. STANLEY. l\'Ir. Speaker, I was very much interested in the argument of the gifted gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. McCALL]--

The SPEAKER. Does the gentleman from Michigan yield to the gentleman from Kentucky?

l\fr. STANLEY. Although I do not entirely agree with him, I will yield him two minutes of the time that has been allotted to me. [Applause.]

l\Ir. McCALL. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Kentucky for yielding to me and for the kindly terms in which he has done so. I had about finished my argument, and I do not think that I care to resume it now. I thank the gentleman from Kentucky, but will return the time to him. ..

l\fr. YOUNG of Michigan. .l\Ir. Speaker, I yield five minutes to the gentleman from Minnesota. [~fr. MILLER].

.1\ir. MILLER Mr. Speaker, as has been said repeatedly, this has not been and is not now a partisan question. I do not think there is much diversity of opinion to be found in the membership of this House upon the general proposition ·· of electing United States Senators by a direct vote of the people. I do think, however, that there has been injected into this general discussion a feature that might properly be considered more at length than the one on which we are practically agreed . I refer, of course, to thn t paragraph which purports to assign and give to the States tlle absolute power to decide the time, manner, and place for the selection of United States Senators. It seems to me, notwithstanding the remarks of the gentleman from Kentucky [Mr. JAMES], that one great branch of the Government is hereby surrendering its power to perpetuate and maintain itself. It is giving to the States a right which the symmetry of the Constitution, which our scheme of government, nationally conceived, requires should rest with tlle Federal power.

The proponents of this feature of the resolution have overlooked the great necessity our Government is under to protect and maintain the respective sovereignties of State and Nation. As all the world knows, the great principles contained in our Constitution were not the invention of the framers of that document, but the result of centuries of political evolution on the part of the Anglo-Saxon race. That feature which is per- nature. haps most original is the division of sovereignty between State and Nation. The distribution of sovereignty, agreed upon in the constitutional convention, has been materially changed during the decades that have passed, due to the unfolding of political and economic forces.

It . is natural that both the States and the Federal Government should be jealous of tlleir rights, and each particularly jealous of any encroachment of power on the part of the other. The very system of our Government, and therefore the perpetuity of our institutions, depend upon the proper distribution of soyereign power between State and nation. By this section of the proposed amendment the Federal Government places tlle control and perpetuity of an important element of its sovereignty in tlle possession of the States. If States have exclusive control of the time, manner, and place of electing United States Senators they can, if it pleases them to usurp the function, control the most important part of tlle legislative branch of tlle Government. By refusing to elect at all, . the legislatiYe arm of the Federal Government would be paralyzed. :Many men now live who witnessed almost one-half of the States withdraw from the Union and refuse to send l'.fernbers to Congress. That which happened once may llappen again, and un<ler such conditions the Federal Government should be able to exercise supreme control over the election of those who are to exercise Federal legislative power.

If, perchance, State legislatures should gt·re to Congress the right to select members of the State legislatures, to prescribe the time, manner, and place, llow ridiculous it would be. Equally ridiculous is it for the National Government thus to surrender its power.

We are frankly told by gentlemen from the other side of the Chamber that the main purpose of this section is to prevent, on the part of the Federal Government, interference with dis· franchisement of the negro, now practically complete, in all tlle Southern States. Such a statement condemns the section and gives em11llatic reason why it should not become a part of the Constitution. If this passes, " · e have a Constitution pre senting the ridiculous spectacle of guaranteeing the right of frnuchise to the negro in one section and effectually taking it nwny in another. But apart from this inconsistency and incongrnity, I do not believe we should indorse or permit any act looking to the disfranchisement of this great multitude that is makiug such great progress in political ability and industrial life. l\Ir. Speaker, I do not suppose any academic discussion can or will c:hange a vote on this question. The majority are for this section, and they <lo not propose to give us an opportunity to eliminate it. In<lu1gently they permit us to talk about it for a little time, but amend it-never! A few days ago, at the beginning of this Congress, we were led to believe the . halcyon days had corn~. Then the leaders on that side, with words that fell with sweet cadence upon our ears, promised that during this Congress full freedom of debate should IJe extended and every opportunity for amendment granted. Here we have the measure of their performance. A proposition as important us any that will come before this Congress is suddenly tllrust upon us, no opportunity given to investigate or consider the far-reaching effect of its imperfectly understood provisions, and we are told to swallow it whole, instantly, keeping from choking if we can.

While I am reluctant to vote for that feature of the resolution I have just mentioned, the importance of the resolution as a whole is so great that I am heartily in its support. This proposed amendment to the Constitution illustrates and effectuates political evolution in the United States. The wisdom of the fathers has often been commented upon because they gave to the country a great Constitution. This credit is their due. They were somewhat skeptical of the ability of the general mass of people to act intelligently and patriotically in things political, but this was due largely to the fact that Anglo-Saxon dernocracy had not been given a trial and historical precedent was lacking. But political evolution in this country has corrected the errors, in this regard, committed by the fathers. They thought the average man could not vote intelligently for President, so they introduced the college of electors. But for many decades the electoral college has been a pure fiction, and in effect each citizen now votes directly for President. Those fathers also thought it wise to take the selecting of Senators from the people and place that power in the hands of the legislatures of the several States. In recent years ~e :find the legislatures of many States bound by law to carry out the will of the people a~ expressed in a. primary election to choose a United States Senator. This evolution indicates that all political power belongs to the people; . that our people can exercise it; and, what is more, propose to exercise it. You can no more change this great law of political evolution than you can change a law of This evolution of 130 years has shown that the power of election of all representatives of the people in each and every department of the Government should remain with the people who are to be served. If they make a mistake, the mistake is theirs, and they have a right to make it. The election by direct ·rntc of the people tends to effectuate what we may term a pure republican form of government of the representative charncteL· conceived runny hundrccl years ago and first brought forth and perfected on tlrn American continent.

I hope that we will pass this by as large and nearly a unani­ Senators? mous ·rnte as possible, to show to the country that the Members of this bod.y on each side of the aisle are advocates of a progressive political theory that shall preserve and keep to the people, where it belongs, every fundamental power of a political nature. [Applause.]

Mr . RUCKER of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I yield five minutes to the gentleman from Arkansas [Mr. ROBINSON].

Mr. ROBINSON. l\fr. Speaker, during tlle course of this debate but two objections have been suggested to the passage of this resolution. The first is a puny plea in abatement. It is claimed IJy some gentlemen on the other side of the Chamber that there is an undue haste in presenting and considering this measure.

The answer to that statement is found in the fact that every Member of . this body understands fully the provision now under consideration. It was thoroughly threshed out and discussed by the Judiciary Committee of the body at the other end of the Capitol, and discussed at great length in that body. Every Member here understands its true import, and there is no necessity or excuse for delay.

I must confess, gentlemen on this side of the Chamber, that it is somewhat gratifying to me to know that the chairman of this committee and the committee having this joint resolution in charge have so promptly and so speedily responded to the demand of the public, which the Republican Party has been dilatory in responding to and has refused to recognize for many years. [Applause on the Democratic side.]

The other objection urged to this measure on that side by the gentleman from Iowa [Mr. PICKETT] and the gentleman from Illinois, the ex-Speaker of the House of Representatives [Ur. Senators. CANNON], namely, that the Federal Government in the adoption of the amendment now proposed is abrogating the power of self-perpetuation and encouraging a spirit of secession, is equally unfounded. I wonder if the gentleman from Illinois, in his efforts to maintain the power of State legislatures to elect Members of the United States Senate, recalls the fact that every State that ever attempted to go out of the Union did so through the passage of an ordinance of secession by its legislature?

Each House will still be the judge of the election returns and qualifications of its own Members if this amendment is finally ratified. That provision of the Constitution is not affected directly by this joint resolution. The manner of holding elections for Senators and Representatives can not fairly be said to involve the perpetuity of the Federal Government, nor can any action of the States in that regard diminish the fundamental powers delegated in the Constitution to the Feclcrn.l Government. This objection seems to be far-fetched, and from a practical standpoint is of no great importance. If the people of the various States are to exercise the power of electing their Senators, no reason appears why the Congress should reserve the right to make or alter the regulations prescribed by the people themselves for the exercise of that power. The power of Congress to make or alter regulations by the States for the election of Members of Congress, if sought to be eliminated by the proposed amerulment, has never appeared to be necessary for the presen-atlon of the National GoYernment nor indispensable to the exercise of its powers. "Force" bills, Federal election laws, in the light of history, have contributed nothing of Ynlue to the administration of the Government and have always proYed distasteful. If the people can be trusted to elect their Senators by popular vote, as appears to be the consensus of opinion, it would seem not improper to provide that they may determine the manner of the election.

I want to suggest to gentlemen that the day for " force " bills bns passed; that there is in no part of this Republic the possibility of the development of any spirit of secession; that issue has long been settled. For the sake of consistency it is well to write into the Constitution with respect to the election of Senn tors a pro-vision similar to that which exists concerning the election of the President of the United States. The Con­ stitution gi-ves to the legislatures of the States the power to fix the manner of selecting presidential electors, and the only limitation upon that power is that-

The Congress may determine the time of choosing the electors and the day on which they shall gh·e their votes, which day shall be the same throughout the United States.

Each State shall appoint, in such manner as the legislature thereof may direct. a number of electors equal to the whole number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled In the Congress-—

And so forth.

You can trust the people to elect a President. Every one con· cedes the fact that the election of presidential electors is prac· tically an election of the President · by the people. Do you want to deny to the people of the States full power to choose their Mr . Speaker and gentlemen, I believe that this resolution ought to IJe adopted for four general reasons.

First. It will increase the power of the pwple . This, to me, is of primary and paramount importance. If auy reason ever existed for requiring that Unitccl States Sena tors IJc elected by legisln.tures and not by popular vote that reason llas long since clisnppearecl. If our political history demonstrates one fact more clearly than any otller, it is the conclusion that abuses are more certainly averted and good government more surely promoted by the recognition in practice of tlle principle tllut tlle people are tlle source of all political power and may be trusted to exercise it.

Second. 1 .rhe adoption of this resolution, and the consequent election of United St::ites Senntors by popular vote, will make the legisJative branch of the Government, incluclin~ the body at the other end of the Capitol, fairly responsirn to the public will. When any question of legislative policy h::ts been agitated and the voters of a State haye renched a conclusion and expressed that conclusion it will no longer be difficult or impossible to induce Members of the bot1y at the other end of this Capitol to yield to the public demand for reforms in legislation. Third. The deadlocks which have so often occurred during recent years in the selection of United States Senators, and the consequent detriment to the public, can not happen if this resolution is passed and ratified by the States. I need not recount the many instances that emphasize the importance of this suggestion. Thnt a State may be deniecl representation in the Senate by reason of the failure of its legislature to elect a Senator has long discredited the prevailing system of electing Fourth. '.rhe shameful and disgraceful practices occurring iu some of the State legislatures in the selection of United ~tatcs Senators will be terminated if the power to choose Senators is exercised directly by the voters. That bribery and various forms of corruption should ha>e become freqnont, not to s:iy common, in the present method of electing Senators is of itself sufficient to discredit the prevailing method and to encourage · us to seek and adopt a system which, it is hopc<l, will be free from such abuses.

The time has come when this amendment will receive the hearty approval of nearly all the States. It will not. of course, relieve the election of Senators from all corrupt . influences, but it will place it directly in the power of the voters to choose Sena.tors who are in accord with the spirit of the times and who will give emphasis to the recognized nncl enlightened view of the voters.

The day of " government by superior people " has passed. Every public citizen will still ha-ve and exercise the power of asserting his views and of seeking to mold sentiment on political questions. The passage of this amendment will no more deprive Senators of the privilege of leading in reforms or of opposing improvident and ill-considered measures than does the election of Congressmen deprive Members of this body of that right and power. It will, however, diminish obstinacy and pre-­ vent the obstruction of needed legislation, and thus bring the Senate closer to the people.

If the voters are to have the power of governing the country if legislative policies are to be fixed by an enJightened public opinion and not by selfish interests, it is necessary that both branches of Congress be fairly responsive to the public will and directly responsible to the people. The passage of legislation, however much desired by one body, results in no ing if defeated in the other .. This frequently occurs now, but it will not happen so often if this amendment is ratificcl.

In this great Republic, employing many thousands of persons, Members of this body, the Members of tlle House of Representatives are the only elective officers. In tlle course of progress the people of the · United States have reached the conclusion that Members of the other legislative body ought also to be elected.

I, for one, am in favor of giving the people that power, and in favor of giving them the power without reservation, because they can exercise it much more skillfully and much better for the Government than it is now exercised. [.Applause.]

The SPEAKER. The time of the gentleman has expired.

Mr. RUCKER of Missouri. l\fr. Speaker, I yield five minutes to the gentleman from Oklahoma [Ur. FEnRrs].

The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Oklahoma. is recognized for flvo minutes.

l\Ir. FEU.RIS. l\Ir. Speaker and gentlemen, stripped of all its verbiage :rncl all its frills this joint resolution amending the United States Constitution, as we are all aware, allows the people to e1ect their Senators by the popular yotc rather than have the ·various le;i slat.ures select them. No gentleman on the opposite side, and no one disposed to oppose this measure, has said that it would not accomplish that purpose. Until such u charge is made we must a ssu me that the opposition is but fanciful rather than real. Tbc opponents of this reform have objected to this i1nrticnlar verbiage and to that, but no opponent of the measure nnc1 no one "Who has even partially favored it has said that it would not accomplish election of Senators by the people. The venerable ex-Speaker C..\.NNoN, who announced that he would not support this resolution, did not say it would not accomplish the purpose, but he objected to something relative to the particular language used. I for one am heartily in favor of this re solut ion as it stands, because it accomplishes what !JO per cent, nay, I believe, 90 per cent, of the people desire. I congratulate tc the chairman of the committee and the committee itself that they have caused this to be the first bill reported. by a Democratic committee. I will wait until the adjournment toclny to congratulate this Democratic House on this being the first bill . tJ111t it passed. I think it is a beautiful tribute to the House of Representatives, I think it is a beautiful tribute to into law . the American people, I believe it is a beautiful compliment to the Democratic Party to pass as their first bill a bill so universally desired . [Applause.]

:.\Iy friends, in looking over the report I om sorry to find a minority report signed by a Republican. Member of this House from the thirty-second district of New York. I um sorry that he assigns only the insufficient reason, which in substance is that he is opposed to it fundamentally . I can not consistently attribute that same view to all. of the minority of this House, because many of them have asserted their fealty and their willingness to support it; but I can not but pause for a moment to suggest that it is but a continuation of their 16 years of dilatory tactics in refusing to give this legislation to the American people. I can not but call attention to the fact that for 16 long years the Republican Party have been in full control of both the House, the Senate, and the Chief Executive, and through all those years, with full power invested in them, they have refused to enact it into 'law . Each of them on the stump and each of them in person can assign reasons, but to the absolute failure to act there can be no valid reason that the people will accept. Men are known better by what they do than by what they say . Political parties are likewise known better by what they do than by what they say . And I might be severe enough to suggest that men sometimes walk one way and look the other. [Applause on the Democratic side.] They sometimes assert they are in favor of the principle involved, but are always found opposing, by reason of some minor detail unworthy and insufficient, to defeat a great principle. And when we observe the bickerings and parliamentary tactics of the gentlemen on the other side of the Chamber we can not but think this is such n case.

The question of right to select Senators by a popular vote is not a new one. Strong men advocate that they be so elected in the Constitutional Convention of 178D . At that time such a group of States as this was not dreamed of, and no one with the most exuberant expectations could have dreamed that such ever would be the case. In 1789 a handful of poor, struggling settlers, to-day a Republic of whom the whole world points with pride and esteem. To-day !J2,000,000 of liberty-loving American citizens asking for this right . To-day I am proud to find a Democratic Rom:e, charged with power to act for the people and in their interests, passing this as their first bill.

·we stand before the people at election time and solicit their support and at the same time their confidence. We are elected only after both have been acquired . Then, why should not it be a matter indeed refreshing to find a Congress willing to do the things that they promised tlle people they would do? For 1G long years the Republicans have trifled with the people's confidence and esteem. For 16 years, with full power to act, they have swept aside the people's wishes as heresies and vagaries, until to-day the party of Lincoln and McKinley has become a byword in tlle streets, and their retirement at the recent election is but eviclence that tllc people longer refuse to be trifled with The gentleman from Miclligan [Mr . YoUNo] complains of corrupt States and the evil effects that would follow if this bill passed in its present form. Can it be that any State in all this Republic is more corrupt than the legislature elected by n. corrupt State? Is he not mistaken in his premises when he predicates an argument on so flimsy a foundation? Is he even misleadin g himself with any argument so flimsy and so un ­ founded? Corruption is found less often nmong American homes than it is around legislatures, and none can gainsay tllc truth of this assertion.

Recent disclosures in the legislatures have be e n appalling to us all. Recent disclosures have not alone blighted the names of the corrupt participants, but have reached out and blasted the fair names of whole States in which they conduct their nefarious deals, made possible only by a system so antequatcd anc1 so unworthy as the election of Senators by the legislatures of the States as distinguished by the patriotic people of the several States .

I can never think this Republic will long stand after we fail to trust the people who pay the taxes in time of peace and shoulder their muskets in time of pestilence and war . I can never think it less safe to trust all the people of any State than it is to trust a few of the same people of the rnme State. I shall never subscribe to such a theory, in office or out. I shall never be a party to any diln tory tactics practiced by the Republicans in this House to delay action on a question so fundamentally correct. I shall never quibble over details when the accomplishment of a great principle is at stake.

The Democratic Party has repeatedly declared for this principle in convention assemblccl, and each platform since my early youth has borne pledges to the people of its enactment I rejoice and rejoice thrice anc.1 thrice again that this Congress during tlle very :first days of its interesting session is going to make - this much-needed reform n. reality. It is but the keeping of faith with the people, and they are entitled to it . It will purify elections. It will bring wholesome results to State and Nation. There are other features of legislation that we have promised the people, and they will follow . It may be asserted that it will · fail in the Republican Senate, and it may; but behind it all the people will know who their friends are, and will also know where the trouble has been these long years . It is my belief, if the Senators were elected by the people so that at each returning campaign the candidates for Senator would have to return to their people and get the indorsement and acquaintance of their people, there would be less unwilling ­ ness to enact laws that all of the people want. Olose contact with the people can only be acquired by forcing the candidate to consult them . Close acquaintance can not be exacted unless the power is vested in the people to punish or reward. When the power is vested in the legislatures of the States, the candidate does not have to proceed further than to acquaint himself with the few members of the legislature to further hold his seat, and the people receive little or, at least, inferior consider ­ ation from him. I rejoice to sec the people coming into their own , and they are eminently entitle(! to it . It js not more, than they should ask . It is but common justice . It will result in nought but good .

It is charged by opponents of the measure that it is revolutionary and socialistic . I deny it, and it is not borne out by the facts . It is common justice and common sense . It is but the doing of exact justice to n. people who have long been denied that right to select their :Members of Congress in both branches. Since I came to Congress I have each session introduced u joint resolution for the election of Senators by the popular \otc. I have a bill pending now, and if this bill fails in a Republican Senate, I shall reintroduce each session as long as I am here, and at each occasion, like " Banquo's ghost," I will appear on the scene until it becomes the law of the land and a part of the .American Constitution .

The American people ha vc said you shall not barter a way their rights by men they did not elect, and you shall · not defeat this legislation without the protest and the knowledge of the people who are wronged by the defeat.

It is charged that none but the rich can afford to run for the Senate if popular election is exacted of them by tlle people. It is not so. Senators are elected for six years, three times the length of the time for which the House Members are chosen, and there is no occasion for the application of such a rule or such a statement. Again it may be said that it is of equal importance that Senators be as near to the people as the more numerous branch of Congress, for each bill and each resolution has to pass both bodies before it becomes a law. I submit for one branch to be responsive and the other inactir-e and irresponsi\~ to the will of the people is almost as deplorable as if both branches were selected otherwise than by the people.

Power begets respect . The absence of power without exception makes respect at best more tardy and usually totally absent. The people should have the power in the abstract, but surely they should have it when it begets for them the respect the Constitution intended them to ha-ve .

Pass this joint resolution and you make no mistake. Pass the resolution and the States will act at their first sitting. Pass this resolution and the American people will see we intend to keep the faith when in power that we advocated when not in power. Pass this resolution and make responsive that body which is too far removed from the aches and pains of the people. Pass it and endear yourselves to the people of a 11 political faiths and enact a reform from which no ill effects can emanate. [Applause.]

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

:!\Ir. FERRIS. I should like to have unanimous consent to ext end my remarks in the RECORD.

The SPEA.l\.."""Ell. The gentleman from Oklahoma asks unanimous consent to extend his remarks in the RECORD. objection?

Mr. CLAilK of Florida. l\Ir. Speaker, reserving the right to object, will the gentleman allow me to make a statement?

Mr. FERRIS. Certainly.

Mr. CLARK of Florida. I want to state that nt this time I will not object, but I put the House on notice that hereafter no speeches not delivered and no extension of remarks will be printed in tl!e RE~oRD in the Sixty-second Congress.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection?

Mr. AI.Al\~. Reserving the right to object, I desire to ask the gentleman from Florida if this rule is to be applied to every- the RECORD. one hereafter?

~fr. CLARK of Florida. What is the gentleman's question?

Mr. MANN. I understand the gentleman from Florida proposes to object to all requests hereafter.

Mr. CLARK of Florida. After to-day; yes.

Mr. l\IANN. Well, I will begin now. I will object.

The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Illinois objects.

l\Ir. RUCKER of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, in view of the fact that this question is important and a great many gentlemen on both sides, I am informed, desire to express their views briefly l\Ir. YOUNG who will not have a chance to consume time on the floor, I ask unanimous consent that all Members of this House, whether they have been recognized or not, who desire to express their Tiews on this great question may be permitted to do so within five legislative days, their remarks to be confined to the subject matter of tlle resolution.

The SPEAKER. The gentleman asks unanimous consent that all Members desiring to print remarks in the RECORD on this question may have five legislative days in which to do so. Is there objection?

Mr . YOUNG of :Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I hope no gentleman will object.

Mr. SHERLEY. Reserving the right to object, I should like to suggest to tlle gentleman from Missouri that his request be modified by the statement that the RECORD shall show that the speech is printed under leave.

Mr. KENDALL. I hope the gentleman will agree to that.

Mr. SHERLEY. I suggest to the gentleman that there has been nn abuse in the past in regard to leave-to-print speeches in the RECORD. ·Now, it is manifest that we must either have much more discussion, or else relief must be given through leave to print in the RE C ORD; but it seems to me proper that there sho uld be something in tlle RECORD to indicate that the speech is printed under leave.

~rr. RUCKER of : Missouri. Mr. Speaker, in answer to the gentleman from Kentucky , let me say, I believe it would be wen to anfo rce the rule with rigor as applicable to mere political C'FSays written into the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, but this is not that. But it is not tllnt. This is a great question, not partisan, nnd it affects all people alike It has its ardent advocates on one sicl c of the Chamber as well as the other. I do not believe nnybocly in reference to this particular question ought to have the rule enforcecl against it.

:\fr. TALBOTT of Mnrylan<l . Mr. Speaker, I shall insist that the spcecl1es s l1all he germane to the resolution.

Mr. RUCKER of Missouri. That was my request, nnd I so statecl.

:Mr . i'\IA.:. ·N. l\Irt Spenker--

Tlle SPEA.KER. Does the gentleman from Missouri yield to th~ gentleman from Illinois?

l\Ir. MANX Mr. Speaker, I have made every effort possihle to get sufficient time for actual discussion upon the proposed m11endrnent to the Constitution . Now, is it the purpose to insert a Jot of speeches in the RECORD to make it appear that we lmd fnll di sc ussion on the subject?

Mr. RUCKER of Missouri. l\ir. Speaker, the gentleman has not :forgotten that, standing quite close to him and making i::iome demonstration, I asked if they wanted two hours or four bonrs or a day for general debnte on that side.

l\!r. l\IANN. Four hours is a day, and we took all the time we coulu get.

Mr. RUCKER of Missouri. I am speaking of a day from the standpoint of 12 hours.

Mr. MA:r-..TN'. Oh, but the gentleman said that he proposed to close general debate and pass this bill to-clay.

Mr. RUCKEH. of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, gentlemen will bear me witness that I ~mid we were going to pass the bill to-day, and I should ask for the previous question if we could not agree on a time fop general debate.

l\Ir. MANN. Well, I am not going to object, and I will withdraw the objection that I heretofore made, because I think it will look better !or us even if we fake in the RECORD an apparent consideration of an amendment to the Constitution Is there which was actually refused in the House.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection?

l\Ir. LAFFERTY. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object to what has been denominated fake speeches, I desire to suggest to the gentleman from Missouri to amend his request for unanimous consent to this effect-that the time for this debate be extended one hour on each side, and if nt the expiration of that time all gentlemen have not been heard on this side or that, the request can be renewed. On this side gentlemen are only taking fl.ye minutes. That is as much time as I desire to have, and I do not desire to put any fake speech in

Mr. RUCKER of .Missouri. Mr. Speaker, the time was agreed upon for general debate at the suggestion, as I understood it, of the gentleman from Michigan. Now, I say to him that if he desires to extend the debate for one hour or two hours, if he will indicate it, I will ask for unanimous con sent.

1\Ir. YOUNG of Michigan. I should be very glad, Mr. Speaker, to agree with the gentleman to extend the time of debate two hours, if satisfactory to him and the House.

Mr. RUCKER of Missouri, Two hours on each side?

of Michigan. One hour on each side.

Mr. RUCKER of Missouri. Let me understand, there is a good deal of confusion. I ask the gentleman from Michigan how much time does he ask to extend general debate?

Mr. YOUNG of Michigan. In view of the general demand for debate about me, I will ask for two hours on each side.

1\Ir. RUCKER of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the time for general debate on this resolution be extended two hours on each side.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection?

Mr. DIES. Mr. Speaker, I object.

The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Texas objects. The gentleman from Missouri asks unanimous consent that all Members ba ve the privilege of printing speeches in the R1wono on this proposed amendment for five legi slative days. Is there objection?

l\Ir. KENDALL. Mr. Speaker, reser1;ing the right to object, I want to inquire of the gentleman from Missouri what is the objection to the suggestion advanced by the gentleman from Kentucky designating the fact in the speech that it was not delivered, but inserted in the RECORD by leave?

Mr. RUCKER of Missouri. So far as I am concerned, I have no objection whatever, but I understood from audible uttGrances all around me that there was objection.

1\Ir. FOSTER of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, _ reserving the right to object, I would like to say that I do not believe it is a proper thing to inject that sort of system in the RECORD at this time.

Mr. KENDALL. Does the gentleman think it is a proper thing to inject a speech in the RECORD without having made it on the floor?

l\Ir . FOSTER of Illinois. If it is proposed to put that statement in the RECORD I shall object myself.

Mr. YOUNG of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, pending this matter, objection having been made to extending the general delmte for two hours on a side, I would ask tl1e gentleman from Missouri to ask unanimous consent to extend the debate one hour on each side.

l\Ir. RUCKER of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I a · sk unanimous consent to extencl general debate one hour on each sicle, tlle time to be divided equally .

The SPEAKER. 'l'he gentleman from Missouri asks unnnlmous consent to extend general debate one hour on each side, one hour to be controlled by the gentleman from Missouri nntl the other by the gentleman from l\lichigan. Is there objection? [After a pause.] The Chair hears none.

l\Ir. RUCKER of l\fis~ouri. Now, l\Ir. Speaker, I desire to renew my request that all gentlemen have five legislative days in which to print remarks on this proposed amendment.

The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Missouri asks unnni- . mous consent that five legislative · e days be allow d in which Members may print remarks in the RECORD upon this proposed amendment. Is there objection?

Mr. SHEllLEY . Mr . Speaker , I shall not at this time object because it lms been a custom long indulged in, but I think the House can well afford to make the RECORD a real journal of the proceedings here, and I shall undertake in some proper way to have such a rule adopted .

It is proper that men who do not have an opportunity to express their views on the floor should have a medium of presenting them to the country, but it is not proper that they should be presented under false pretenses . [Applause . ]

The SPEAKER. Is there objection? [.After a pause.] The Chair hears none, and it is so ordered .

Mr . YOUNG of Michigan . Mr. Speaker, I yield three minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr . CAnY].

Mr . CARY . Mr . Speaker, I nm heartily in favor of the amendment to elect the United States Senators by a direct vote of the people , and I am heartily in favor of another amend merit which I believe is just us important, and perhaps more important, at least of as much importance, as the election of the United States Senators by a direct vote of the people, and for that reason I ask in my time to present the following amendment, which I send to the desk and ask to. have read: :

The Clerk read as follows: :

That there be, and there is hereby , proposed the following amendmcnt to the Constitution, which, when ratified as the . Constitution pr e scribes, shall become and be effective as part of the Constitution , us fol},o;Esc : 1 . Members and Delegates to the House of Representatives of the Congress of the United States shall be elected, after the passage of this bill, for a term of f our years .

"SEC. 2. Said election shall take place at the time and on the day pre s cribed b:'ij_ law for the casting of the popular vote for President of the United States, and in the manner pre s cribed by law by the different States · and Territories."

Mr . CARY. Mr . Speaker, I introduce this because I think it is as important as a direct vote for United States Senators . I believe that the fewer elections we have for Congressmen the better for all concerned . You can not sit in Congress and every two years run for office and do justice to the people who send you here . The fact of the matter is, you are in politics all of the time, and you do not have time enough to do justice in twoyear terms . For that reason I offer this amendment.

l\ir. YOUNG of , Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I yield five minutes to the gentleman from Oregon [Mr . LAFFERTY] .

Mr . LAFFERTY . Mr. Speaker, it must be very apparent to gentlemen on the other side of the House by this time that a great many Members who are sincerely in favor of the election of Senators by a direct -vote of the people have some objection to the resolution in the form in which it is presented. . If you gentlemen on the other side of the House are earnestly, honestly, and sincerely in favor of bringing about this great reform, to wit, the election of the United States Senators by a direct vote of the people, it behooves you to assert your independence upon the roll call upon the issue that is now presented, and send this resolution to the legislatures of the several States in such form that it will be adopted. It is plain to everyone that a great majority of the Members in this House favor the election of Senators by a direct vote of the people . We all know that a great majority of the citizens of this country are in favor of that reform, and would so express themselves if they had an opportunity to vote upon it, but I do not believe that a majority of the people of the United States would vote for the Federal Congress to surrender absolutely the power that it now has and has always maintained, to prescribe, if needs be how Members of the lower and upper Houses of Congress should be elected.