April 13, 1911

And the electors in each State shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State leglslatureExactly what we have here, except--

Mr. MANN rose.

Mr. RUCKER of Missouri. Oh, I know you find a surplus "s," and as long as the gentleman is on guard he will always find the “s’s” in all reform measures, and an " s" is such an obstacle that that great leader of Republicanism in the city of Chicago can not get over it.

But let me say to you, sir, if conditions had existed 130 years ago that exist to-day those distinguished patriots of this country never would have written into the Constitution some of its yet cherished provisions. .At that time the human mind had never been traduced by a thought so foul as that a great people would ever stoop to such practices as we learn are sometimes found in great States and in the legislatures of those States. I heard the gentleman mention the State of Illinois awhile ago, and I thought," What a great State it is; in fact, it has made more history in the last six months than the Southern Confederacy made in four years." [.Applause and laughter on the Democratic side.]

l\fr. l\f.A.NN. Illinois made more history in the four years of the Civil War than the Southern Confederacy did.

Mr. RUCKER of Missouri. I hope I will have no interruptions. I did not intend to consume any time. I yield 15 minutes to the gentleman from Kentucky [l\Ir. SIIERLEY]. [.Applause.]

l\fr. SHERLEY. Mr. Speaker, it is with some degree of embarrassment that I undertake to close this debate on this very important subject, for I speak without any preparation . and without previous determination. I shall not waste much of the 15 minutes allowed me in answer to the criticisms of the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. MANN] as to the phraseology of this bill. Some of these criticisms have already been answered by the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. RucKER] ; but it may not be amiss to call the attention of the gentleman from Illinois again to the fact that an accurate and careful reading of the Constitution itself might have saved him from the mistake of one of his criticisms. He complained that while much has been said here of the direct vote of the people, yet when we framed the terms of the resolution we provided only that "the Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof." Had he remembered ­ because he has undoubtedly read-the second section of .Article I of the Constitution, he would have remembered that it is in this language :

The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second year by the people of the several States.

Nothing is said there of the direct vote, though Representatives are thus elected, and there is no more necessity for it here than there.

But I desire to come to the real propositions that are here involved. It is perhaps unnecessary at this late day to say anything as to the merits of the major proposition; and yet it may not be amiss to note with reference to the eulogy of the gentleman's party that the only voices that have been raised against the major proposition to elect Senators by direct \ote of the people have been Republican. [.Applause on the Democratic side.]

No Democrat on this floor has criticised that proposition . But the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. MANN] is peculiarly solicitous for State sovereignty and State rights, and Ile assumes that because you provide n different method of electing Senators you have struck a deathblow to State sovereignty. I lln\e never been able to follow that logic. .As pointed out by the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. CooPER], you can not change, without the consent of each State, the equal representation o f tlle States in the Senate, and simply changing the method of e1 e c:ting Senators does not in the slightest degree do away with the power of the States themselves as sovereigntie!'l.

Of course, if you accept the gentleman's pr e mise, thRt one amendment of the Constitution necess : uily mcnns uuto1d amendments to the Constitution, why, then, tlln.t conclu s ion of his, or any other conclusion, would be entirely lo...,.ical. But that has not been the history of amendments to the Constitution, and there is nothing now to warrant the assumption.

But the question that is really interesting this House, and the qu es tion that I desire to come to, is not the major proposition, th e election of Senators by direct vote of the people, but it is that proposition involved in the substitute offered by the gentleman from Michigan, as to whether we should not have in the Constitution, as it is proposed to be amended, the power in the Federal Government to control the election of United States Senators. That is the real question at issue here.

Now, if it were possible, as suggested repeatedly by the gentlemen on this side, to provide for direct vote of Senators by the people without changing the present power that exists in the Congress of the United States relative to the election of Sena­ wrong use. tors, I would agree that it was highly improper to bring into this question another question about which there is such a division of opinion. But bear in mind this basic fact, that the very moment that you provide by constitutional amendment that Senators shall be elected by direct vote of the people instead of by the legislatures of the States, that moment, unless you make further provision, you have enlarged the power of the Government of the United States over the election of Senators of the United States.

I repeat, that the moment you change the form of the election from that by the legislature to that by direct vote of the people, that moment you have enlarged the power of the Federal Government over such elections. The power that exists today under the Constitution as to the election of Senators and Representatives, while in the same language, is not, in a practical real sense, the same power.

Mr. MONDELL. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. SHERLEY. For a question only.

Mr. MONDELL. The gentleman will recollect that the resolution introduced by the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. LLOYD] in the last Congress, and which was reported and which I have offered as a substitute, contains no reference to section 4, Article I. Would the gentleman hold that that resolution extended the power of the Federal Government?

Mr. SHERLEY. Mr. Speaker, I simply answer that it is not material as to what was provided in any former resolution. The material thing is what we shall provide in this amendment I have not time in the 15 minutes to discuss the various bills that have been introduced. I say to you, in my judgment, that if you are not to enlarge the power of the Federal Government you must add something besides the simple provision as to the method of electing Senators.

The power of Congress over elections for Representatives in Congress is practically complete. While Congress may not prescribe the qualification of voters, and while that right is left entirely with the States, subject only to the provisions of the fifteenth amendment, y e t Congress can, by regulating the "manner " of holding these elections, give to the Federal Government complete control, as it actually did during the reconstruction period. As to ele c tion of Senators, Congress can now give to the Federal Government no such powers. Practically speaking 1 its power o v er their elec t ion is so slight as to be negligible. But the sole change from election of Senators by the legislatures to an election by direct vote carries with it an enlargement of power. This it is that brings us face to face with the two propositions. The proposition on that side of the House is that we shall enlarge that power by limiting the amendment to the change to direct vote of the people so as to make 1t coequal and coextensive with the power of the Federal Government now as to the election of Members of Congress. The proposition on this side is that we should not give to the National Government the power over the election of Senators. That is the real issue clean-cut, and there can be no doubt about it

What is the history? The history of the provision of the Constitution in regard to both Members of the House and the Senate is that it was put in there not with the idea that the Federal Government should actually supervise the manner and method of holding the election of Members of Congress or of the Senate , but that in the event of the State failing to provide the machinery and method for election, a fear that was then prominent and warranted, then the United States should exercise that power. But when the matter came to be construed as States. to the power in reg a rd to .Members of Congress, the Supreme Court of the United States held that the Congress of the United States had the power, without regard to the failure of the State, to re g ulate the method of electing Representatives to the Congress of the United States.

We in the South have bad confronting us a very grave and very serious problem-a problem that, according to the best jud g ment o · f the southern people, involved the supremacy of the white race in those States. Out of much of turmoil, out of much that might not be defended in the cold forum of law, have. has come now a solution that has been upheld by the courts, and that to-day is making for the future prosperity and safety of the entire land. We are not willing, runny of us, to endanger that status, believing it to be most vital, by giving a power as to elections more extensl ve than now belongs to the ] f ederal Government.

I am one of those men who believe that the day has gone by when we will ever see the power of the National Government enforced as it was enforced during reconstruction days; but we do not believe that it is essential to this question to augment that power and to give additional opportunity for its The gentleman from Illinois [Mr. MANN] asks what reason in logic can be given why a different rule should apply to the election of Members of the House and Members of the Senate. I might answer him by saying that to-day there exists a different rule in regard to the power of the Federal Go · Government as to electors who elect a President and Members of the House of Represen ta ti ves.

According to cold logic and theory, if the Federal Government should have power to control the election of Members of this House, which is necessary to its continued existence, it ought also to have power to control the election of electors who select a President of the United States, also necessary to the continuance of its existence. There is also a reason why the States in the election of Senators should not be subject to the same control that the individual election of Members is subject to. The States in selecting Senators do act in a sovereign capacity. They send Senators not simply as Members of the National Legislature, but they send them, in a sense, as ambassadors of a sovereign State, and to my mind it seems utterly foolish to say that you are willing to trust the people of the States to select these Senators, to have power to select them in the broad sense, and yet ~u are not willing to trust them with the arrangement of the manner and method of holding the election. Either the one position is not warranted or the other is not.

Mr. LAFFERTY. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. SHERLEY. For a question.

Mr. LAFFERTY. Suppose the time should come when any State should become dissatisfied with the way the Federal Government was being carried on and should refuse to provide for the election of a Senator?

Mr. SHERLEY. Frankly I say that if you gentlemen are dealing with it from that single position, men on. this side of the House ought not to have, and I believe would not have, any objection to a provision that gave to the Federal Government control, predicated upon the basic fact only of the State having failed to act; but I say to you that there is no more danger to-day of the States failing to act than of any other unheard-of event.

At the time that that fear was entertained, and at the time when that fear was potent enough to put into the Constitution the provision we find there, there were many who believed the Constitution would never be ratified by the States; there were many who believed. it would not last even if ratified; that the States, with their jealousy of each other, would undermine · its powers; but no man to-day, after a hundred years of national existence, but realizes that the Nation as a nation is here to stay; that it will never die for failure of the component parts of it to elect Senators to the Congress of the United States. [Applause.] Such a proposition is unthinkable.

Mr. JACKSON. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. SHERLEY. Yes.

Mr. JACKSON. Mr. Speaker, I desire to ask the gentleman a question, purely for information. Does he agree with his colleague that this resolution will not be approved by the legislatures of the Southern States if this provision limiting the power of the Federal Government is not placed in it?

Mr. SHERLEY. Why, I have no opinion to express. In my own State we have a suffrage without limitation of any sort, and the question would not be vital there except as public opinion is influenced by public opinion in sister Southern

The SPEAKER. The time of the gentleman has expired.

l\fr. RUCKER of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I believe I have still a few minutes remaining.

The SPEAKER. The gentleman has five minutes remaining.

Mr. RUCKER of Missouri. Then, I yield the remaining five minutes to the gentleman from Kentucky. [Applause.]

Mr. SHERLEY. Mr. Speaker, I have no right to speak for these States, but gentlemen J.i:fre argued tllnt we were in;, periling the amendment by putting in it the provisions that we

I say to you that, in my judgment, it is more likely to receive the approval of the necessary States in the present form than in tllc form proposed in the substitute of the gentleman from Michigan [Mr, YouNo]. That is simply my opinion for what it may be worth. tute? l\ir. JACKSON. One question more, Is it fair, either to the minority party in this House or the success of this great prin­ last. ciple for which the gentleman has been contending, to impose ment upon the Northern States the burden of explaining· to the hun­ those drecls of thousands of colored men who <lo really vote the great principle which the gentleman has been endeavoring to debate here to-day? [Applause.]

l\lr. SHERLEY. 1\fy answer to the gentleman is simply this: We have on this side presented a proposition that we believe ought to be adopted. 'Ve force no man here, and can force no Austin man, to accept our view. If a majority of the membership of this House see fit to amend this bill as the gentleman would Berg e r like, well ancl good. I am still sufficiently in favor of the prin­ Bowman ciple to vote for the constitutional amendment even in the changed form, but it is certainly as fair for _ us to present our Butler Calder proposition as it is for that side to present theirs, and I fur- Cannon - ther say to the gentleman that we are not making necessary any Catlin explanation on the part of the gentleman to any person, white Cop ey or black, in the North. We do not by this amendment change Crago in one single particular the rights of the negro as a citizen of the United States. We do not in any sense interfere with the Davidson protection of those rights under the thirteenth, fourteenth, and Davis, fifteenth amendments, and I would say-- Dodds

Mr. LAFFERTY. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield for Dwight Dyer a question? Esch

The SPEAKER. Does the gentleman from Kentucky yield to Farr the gentleman from Oregon? Foss

Mr. SHERLEY. I decline to yield-but we do say this, that we believe it to be unwise to give to the Federal Government Fuller French an enlarged grant of power touching the manner of holding G11lett elections in the States. We do not believe that such grant of Good power is nece ssa ry, and we are not willing, not believing it to be necessary, to give it. There has been nothing in the history Adair of the country that warrants the belief that it is necessary in order · to preserve .. rn the Government, and that, to my mind, is the only valid reason that it should be granted. Allen l\lr. LAFFER'l,Y. l\lr. Speaker-- . Tlle SPEAKER. Does the gentleman from Kentucky yield to the gentleman from Oregon? Ayres - Mr. SHERLEY. The gentleman from Kentucky does not yield. ·

The SPB:z\..KER. The gentleman from Kentucky declines to Beall, Tex. yield.

l\Ir . SHERLEY. l\fr. Speaker, I have, , as I stated, made this Boollcr sp ech without preparation, with the consequent confusion of Borland thought that results therefrom.

In conclusion , let me say to the membership of this House Brown Buchanan that I believe it easy for men to find excuses to vote against Bulkley this amendment, but to the man who actually, sincerely, fundamentally believes that you will improve the conditions of service to be had in the Senate of the United States by putting the Byrnes, power of electing Senators directly in the hands of the people, to such a man I say there is nothing in the form of the amendment as offered here to-day that ought to make him pause for Can trill one moment, and to the Members on that side of the aisle, Carlin as well as on this, who actually believe, not nominally be­ Carter Clark, lieve, in the principles of government by the people, I ap­ Claypool penl for a support of the amendment. [Loud and continued applause.] Cline

The SPEAKER. Under the agreement the previous question Connell operates on the resolution and on all of the amendments. The Clerk will report the first amendment.

The Clerk read as follows:

By ~Ir. Yocxo of Michigan : , Cullo~ Amend as follows: Strike out, on page 1, the language beginning in Davis, lln c 7, as follows: "And in lieu of all of paragraph 1 of section 4 of Dent said .Article I, in so far as the same relates to any authority In Con­ Denver gress to make or alter regulations as to · the times or manner of holding elections for Senators."

And strike out, on page 2, the language beginning in line 9, as follows:

"The times, places, and manner of holding elections for Senators shall be as prescribed in each State by the legislature thereof."

The SPEAKER. The question is on agreeing to the amend­ Ames ment. Andrus l\Ir. YOUNG of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, at this point, in order Bates to save time, I wm call for the yeas and nays on the amendment. Boehne

The SPEAKER. The gentleman from .Michigan [l\fr. YOUNG] demands the yeas and nays.

XLVII-1G

The yeas and nays were ordered. Mr. MONDELL. l\Ir. Speaker, a parliamentary inquiry. The SPEAKER. The gentleman will state it. 1\fr. MONDELL. Is it not in order to vote on the substitute? SPEAKER. The vote will be taken on the substitute The Clerk will call the roll. Those in favor of the amendwill answer "aye," and those opposed will answer "no ' 1 ; present and not voting will answer " present."

The question was taken; and there were-yeas 123, nays 189, answered " present " 2, not voting 75, as follows :

YElA.S-123.

Akln,N. Y. Greene Lenroot Prince Anderson, Minn. Guernsey Lindbergh Prouty

Hamilton, Mich. Loud Recs

Barebfeld Hanna l\IcCall Roberts, Mass. Bartholdt Harris McD erm ott Roberts, Nev. Hartman McKinley Rodenberg

Hau~en McKinne{: Sloan

Burke, S. Dnk. Haw ey MeLaugh in Smith, J. M. C. Hayes McM'oi·i·an Smith, Saml. W.

Helgesen Ma cl den Speer

Henry, Conn. Madison Steenerson Hlll l\Inlby Stephens, Cal. Coofier Hinds l\Iann Sterling Howell Mnrtln, S. Duk. SteYens, l\Iinn. Howland Mntthews Sulloway Dalzell IIubbard Miller Switzer Danforth Humphrey, Wash. Mondell Taylor, Ohio Jackson Moore , Pa. Thlstlewood

Minn. Kuhn Morgan Towner

Kendall Mott Utter

Kennedy l\Iurdock Volstead K en t Needham Wnrburton Kinkaid, Nebr. Nelson Wedemeyer

Know land Norris 'WJldcr

Fordncy Kopp Nye Willis

Lafe an Parran Wil son , Ill. Foster, Vt. LnITerty Patton, Pa. Wood, N. J. La Follette Pickett Wood s , Iowa. . Langham Porter Young, Kans. Lan g ley Powers Young, Mich.

Lawrence Pray

NAYS-180.

Dies Jones Rodd enber y Adamson Difcnderfer Kindred Rothermel Aiken, S. C. Dixon, Ind. Kipp Rnl> cy Alexander Donohoe Kitchin !tuck er, Colo. Doremus Konig Ru cker, Mo. .Anderson, Ohio D .oug hton Konop Rnssell Ans berry Dupre Korbly Sauath Ashbrook Edwards Lamb Saunders

Faison Lee, Ga. Scully

Barnhart Ferris Lee, Pa. Shackleford Bartlett l!'itZriCrfild Legare Sharp Bathrick l!~lood, Vu. L e Yer Sheppard

Floyd, Ark. Levy Sherley

Bell, Ga. Foster, Ill. Lewis Sherwood Blackmon Francis Linthicum Sims

Gurner Littlepage Sisson

Garr et t Littleton Slayden

Brantley Glass Lloyd Sm1tll Godwin, N. C. Lo beck Smith, Tex. Gocke McCoy Spnrkman

Goodwin, Ark. McGilllcuddy Stanley

Burke, Wis. Gordon l\Iacon Stedman Burleson Gould Mnguire, Nebr. Stephens, Miss. Bnrnett Grny Maher Stephens, Tex.

S. C. Gregg, ra. Martin, Colo. Stone

Ilyrns, Tenn. Gregg, Tex. Mnys Sulzer Calin way Gudger Moon, Tenn. Sweet Candler Hamill Moore, Tex. Talbott, Md. Hamlin Morrison Tnylor, Ala.

Hammond MoRs, Ind. Thnyer

Hardwick Murray Thomas

Fla. Hardy Oldfield Townsend

· Harrison, l\Iiss. O'Slw.unessy Tribble

Clayton Harrison, N. Y. Padgett Turnbull li~rm Page Tuttle

Co Iller Patten, N. Y. Underhill Henry, Tex. Pepper Underwood Covington Holland Peters Watkins Cox, Ind. Houston Po s t Whitacre Cox, Ohio Howard Pon WJckliffe Cravens Hughes, Ga. Pujo Wilson, N. Y. Hufihes, N. J. Ralney WH son, Pa.. Daug erty Hu Raker Witheri;poon W. Va. Humphreys, Miss. Randell, Tex. Young, Tex. Jacoway Rau ch The Speaker

James Re11Iy

Dickinson Johnson, Ky. Richardson Dickson, Miss. Johnson, S. C. Robinson

ANSWERED " PRESENT "-2.

Cary Kinkead, N. J.

NOT VOTING-75.

Burke, Pa. Driscoll, D. A. Fornes

Campbell Driscoll, M. El. Fowler

Anthony Conry · Eli.erbe GaJio.ghcr Crumpacker Estopinal Gardner, Mass. Bin~bnm Curley Evans Gardner, N. J.

Currier Fairchild George

Bradley Davenport Fields Goldfogle Broussard De Forest Finley Graham Burgess Draper Focllt Griest

Hamilton, W. Vu. Loudenslager Payne Smith, N. Y. He:i.!U McCreary Plumley Stack Het1ln McGuire, Okla. Ransdell, La. Talcott, N. Y. Hensley McHenry Redfield Taylor, Colo. Hi1rnins McKenzie Riordan Tilson Hobson Mitchell Rouse Vreeland Hughes, W Va. Moon, Pa. Sells Webb Lntra · Morse, Wis. Simmons Weeks Lindsay Olmsted Slemp White Longworth Palmer Smith, Cal.

So the amendment was rejected.

The Clerk announced the following pairs:

For the session :

Mr. FINLEY with l\fr. CURRIER. l\fr. FonNES with Mr. BRADLEY. l\1r. RronDAN with Mr. ANDRUS. Until further notice: 1\Ir. BoErrNE with Mr. BURKE of Pennsylvania. Mr. FIELDS with l\fr. HUGIIES of West Virginia. l\Ir. DANIEL A. DRISCOLL with l\Ir. FOCHT. Mr. ESTOPINAL with Mr. GABDNEU of Massachusetts. Mr. EVANS with Mr. GARDNER of New Jersey. Mr. LINDSAY with Mr. McKENZIE. l\Ir. McHENRY with Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Smrn of New York with l\lr. PLUMLEy, l\fr. STACK with Mr. SIMMONS. l\Ir. TAYLOR of Colorado with l\Ir. TILSON. l\Ir. WITITE with l\lr. VREELAND. Mr. RANSDELL of Louislanu with l\fr. SLEMP. Mr. WEDB with l\Ir. HIGGINS. l\fr. GALLAGHER with Mr. BINGHA.1.I. l\lr. PAL.urn with l\Ir. HEALD. l\fr. TALCOTT of New York with Ur. MICHAELE. DRISCOLL. Mr. HENSLEY with l\Ir. LorrnWOR'l'H. l\Ir. KINKEAD of New Jersey with l\Ir. LouDENSLAcEn. l\Ir. H. t UIILTON of West Virginia with 1\!r. DR.APER. From April G to April 14, inclusive: Mr. FOWLER with Mr. WEEKS. From April 11 to April 14, noon: l\Ir. HEFLm with Mr. McCreary. Until Monday, April 17: Mr. HODSON with l\fr. FAIRCIIILD. Mr. DAVENPORT with Mr. OLMSTED. l\Ir. GBAilAM with :Mr. Bares. l\Ir. GOLDFOGLE with Mr. MOON of Pennsylvania. For this vote : 1\Ir. CuRLEY (against) with Mr. DE FOREST (in farnr). l\Ir. GEORGE (against) with Mr. Antony (in favor). l\Ir. Rol1SE (against) with Mr. Griest (in favor). Mr. CoNBY (against) with l\Ir. SELLS (in fasor). l\Ir. ELLiRilE (against) with Mr. CA:liPDELL (in favor). The result of the vote was announced 11S above recorded. The SPEAKER. The Clerk will report the next amendment. The Clerk read as fallows :

By :i\lr. Cary: :

On page 3 adJl: "That there be and there is hei'elJy proposed the following nmendi:nent to the Constitution, which, when ratified ns the Constitution prescribes, shall become effective as a part of the Constitution , as follows :

" That there be, and there is hereby, proposed the following amendment to the Constitution, which, when ratified as the Constitution prescribes, shall become and be effective as part of the Constitution, as follows:

"•SEC. 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 n term of four years.

" ' SEC. 2. Said election shall take place at the time and on the day prescribed uy law for the casting of the popular vote for President of the United States, and in the manner prescribed by law by the different Adair States and Territories.' "

The SPEAKER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment.

The question was taken, and the amendment was rejected.

The SPEAKER. The Clerk will report the next amendment. Anderson, Ohio The Clerk read as follows:

By Mr. lli:N"N:

Amend page 2, line 4, by inserting after the word "by " the following, " n direct vote of.”

The SPEAKER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment.

The question was taken, and the amendment was rejected.

The SPEAKER. The Clerk will report the next amendment, also offered by the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. MANN].

The Clerk read as follows:

Amend pnge 2, lines 7 and 8, by striking out the word " legislatures" Borland and inserting the word "legislature."

l\Ir. RUCKER of Missouri. Ur. Speaker, I believe I would like to see the gentleman from Illinois gain one -victory in this contest, and I therefore hope this amendment will be accepted. [Laughter.]

The SPEAKER. The question is on ngreeing to the amendment.

The question was taken, and the amendment was agreed to.

The SPEAKER. The Clerk will report the next amendment. The Clerk read as follows :

Amend page 2, line 10, by striking out the words “that the legislature of any State may empower," and, in line 16, by striking out the word "to" and in se rting in lieu thereof the word shall.”

The SPEAKER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment.

The question was taken, and the amendment was reject:

The SPEAKER The Clerk will report the ne.~t nmendment, also by Mr. l\IANN.

The Clerk read as follows:

Amend page 2, line 18, by striking out the words "so" and ' " “as

The SPEAKER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment.

The question was taken, :rncl the amendment was rejectcJ. Tllc SPEAKER. Tlle question now is on the substitute offere(l by the gentleman from Wyoming [Mr. MONDELL]. The Clerk will report it.

The Clerk read as follows:

Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert the following :

"That the following amendment be proposed to the le g islntun :s of the several States, which, when ratified by three-fourths of said legislatures, shall become and l>e a part of the Constitution, namely: In lieu of the first and second paragraphs of section 3 of Article I of the Co n­ stitution of the United States of America, the following shall be proposed as an amendment to the Constitution : 1 " • SEC. 3. That the Senate of the United States shall be compoiied of I one vote ; n plurality of the votes cnst foy can.didntes f?1: Senator sha ll two Senators from each State, who shall be elected by a direct vote of the people thereof for a term of six years, nn<1 each Senator shall have elect, uud the electors shnll have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State le <>1sl:i.ture.

"• wnen vncanclcs happen, by resignation or oth e rwise, In the representation of any Stnte in the 8enatc, the snme shall be filled for the une:cpired term thereof in the snme manner as ls provided for the election of Senators in parngrnph 1 : I'rovidecZ, That the executive t.here<>f shall make temporary nppointment until the next general or spec ial election, held in nccordance with the stntutes or constHution of suc h State.'

"This amendment shall not lie GO consll·ued as to affect the election or term of any Senator chosen before it becomes valid as a part .of the Constitution." I The SPEAKER. The question is on ngrccin~ to the sul>stitute.

~he question was tnken, and the substitute was rejected. · 1 The SPEAKER. The question recurs on the engrossment ancl third rending of the joint resolution.

The joint resolution was orucred to be engrossed and read n. third time, and was rend the third time.

Tlle SPEAKER. The question now is on the passage of the joint resolution.

SEVERAL MEMBERS. The yens und nnys !

:Mr. RUCKER of l\Iissouri. l\Ir . Speaker, I lluYc no desire to detain the membership of this House here by er.Hing for the yeas nnd nays, because I beJicye the House is practically n. unit on this - mensure. But if gentlemen wnnt a yen-nnu-nay -vote, there is no objection.

The SPEAKER. The question is on the passa gc of the joint resolution.

Mr. LENROOT. Mr. Speaker, I demand the yeas and nays. The yeas and nays were ordered.

The question was taken; and there were-yens 200, nays 16, answered "present" 0, not voting 77, as follows:

YJDA.S-~<>G.

Burleson Dn · vls, Minn. Glass

Adamson Burnett Davis, W. Va . Godwin, N. C. Aiken, S. C. Butler Dent Goeke Akin, N. Y. Byrnes, S. C. Denver Good Alexander Byrns, Tenn. Dickinson Goodwin, Ark. Allen Calder Dickson, Miss. Gordon Anderson, Minn. Callnwuy Dies Gould

Candler Difenderfer Gray ansberry Cantrill Dixon, Ind. Greene Ashbrook Carlin Donohoe Gregg , Pa. Austin Carter Doremus · Gregg, Tex. Ayres Cury Doughton Gudger Barchfeld Cutlln Dupre Guernsey nnrnhart Clnrk, Fla. Dyer Ilrunlll Bartholdt Claypool F.dwnrds Hnrullton, Mich. Bartlett Clayton Esch Hamlin nathrick Cline Faison Hammond Beall, Tex. Collier Farr Hanna Bell, Gn. Connell Ferr ls II a rd wick llergcr Cooper Fitzgerald Hardy Blackmon Copley Flood, Va. Harrison, Miss. Booher Covington li'loycl, Ark. Harrison, N. Y.

Cox, Ind. Foss Hartma n

Bowman Co~ Ohio Foster, Ill. Haugen Brantley ago Foster. Vt. Hawley Brown Cravens Francis llny Buchanan French II ayes nulkley g~\~~~l Fuller Helgesen Burke, S. Dak. Dau""herty Garner Helm Burke, Wis. Dnvfdson Garrett Henry, Conn.

Henry, Tex. Levy Patton, Pa. Smith, Tex. Hill Lewis Pepper Sparkman Hollnnd Lindbergh Peters Speer Hou sto n Linthicum Pickett Stanley Mowar<'I. Littlepage Porter Stedman Howell Littleton Post Steenerson Howlund Lloyd Pou Stephens, Cal. HulJbard Lo beck Powers Stephens, Miss. Hng-hc;;, Ga. Loud Pray Stephens, Tex. Hug-hes, N . J. McCoy Prince Sterling Hull McGillicuddy Prouty Stone Humphrey, Wash. McKinley Pujo Sulzer Huwphreys, Miss. McKinn ey Halncy Sweet Jackson McLaughlin Raker Switzer Jac owa y Macon Randell, Tex. 'l'albott, Md. .T James Madden Rauch Taylor, A la. John so n, Ky. Madison Rer.s Taylor, Ohio Johnson, S. C. Maguire, Nebr. Heilly Tb ayer Jones Maher Richardson Thomas Kahn Martin, Colo. Roberts, Mass. Towner Kendall Martin, S. Dak. Roberts, Nev. Townsend Kennedy Matthews Robinson Tribble Kent Mays H.oddenbery Turnbull Kindred Miller Hod enberg Tuttle Kinkaid, Nebr. Mondell Hotbermel Underhill Kinkead, N. J. Moon, Tenn. Rubey Underwood Kipp Moore, Pa. Rucker, Colo. Volstead Kitchin Moore, Tex. Rucker, Mo. Warburton Knowland Morgan Russell Watkins Konig Morrison Sabath Wedemeyer Konop Moss, Ind. Saunders Whitacre Kopp Mott Scully White KorlJly Murdock Shackleford Wickliffe Lafean Murray Sharp Willis Lair rty Needham Sheppard Wilson, Ill. La Follette Nelson Sherley Wilson, N. Y. Lamb Norris Sherwood Wilson, Pa. Langham Nye Sims Witherspoon Langley Oldfield Sisson Wood, N. J. Lee, na . O'Shaunessy Slayden Woods, Iowa Le e , l'a. Padgett Sloan Young, Kans. Legare Page Small Young, Mich. Lenroot Parran Smith, J. M. C. Young, Tex. Lever Patten, N. Y. Smith, Saml. W. The Speaker

NAYS-16.

Cannon Fordney McCall Mann Danfol'th Harris McDermott · Sulloway Dodds Hinds McMorran Utter Dwight Lawrence Mal by Wilder

NOT VOTING-77.

Ames Ellerbe Hensley Redfield ~~\~~~Y ~~~o!sinal ~~i~~~ Riordan Rouse llates Fairchild Hughes, W. Va. Sells Bln~ilam Fields Latta Simmons Boehne Finley Lindsay Slemp Bradley Focht Longworth Smith, Cal. Rrous sn rd Fornes Loudenslager Smith, N. Y. Bur gess Fowler McCreary Stack Burke, Pa. Gallagher McGuire, Okla. Stevens, Minn. Campbell Gardner, Mass. McHenry Talcott, N. Y. Conry Gardner, N. J. McKenzie Taylor, Colo. Crum11acker George Mitchell Thistlewood Curley Gillett Moon, l'a. Tilson Currier Goldfogle Morse Vreeland Davenport Graham Olmsted Webb De Forest Griest Palmer Weeks Draper Hamilton, W. Va. Payne • Driscoll, D. A. Heald Plumley Driscoll, M. ID. Heflin Ransdell, La.

The SPEAKER. The Clerk will call my nnn:ie.

The Clerk called the name of Mr. CLARK of .Missouri, and he voted in the affirmative.

So (two-thirds voting in the affirmative) the joint resolution was passed.

The Clerk announced the following additional pairs: Until further notice: l\Ir. BOEHNE with Mr. STEVENS of Minnesota. l\Ir. SMITII of New York with 1\fr. DE FOREST. 1\lr. RousE with Mr. GRIEST. 1\Ir. CURLEY with l\Ir. LOUDENSLAGER. l\Ir. CONRY with .l\fr. SELLS. l\Ir. ELLERBE with Mr. CAMPilELL. l\Ir. GEOilGE with ]\fr. ANTHONY. 1\lr. LINDSAY with Mr. GILLETT. The result of the vote was announced as above recorded. On motion of Mr. RUCKER of Missouri, a motion to reconsider the last -vote was laid on the table.