April 20, 1911

The VICE PRESIDENT. Is there further morning business? If not, morning business is closed.

Mr. CULBERSON. Mr. President, I call up the motion entered on Monday last to refer the joint resolution respecting the election of Senators by the people to the Committee on the Judiciary.

The VICE PRESIDENT. The Sena.tor from Texa.s moves to refer to the Committee on the Judiciary the joint resolution referred to, which will be read the second time by its title. The joint resolution (H. J. Res. 39) proposing an amendment to the Constitution providing that Sena.tors shall be elected by 'the people of the several States was read the second time by its title.

Mr. DILLINGHAM. Mr. President, I do not rise to oppose the motion; but I do think that a statement should be made so th:i. t there may be no confusion in the future regarding the reference of resolutions of this character. I think that an examination of the record will show that for 40 years every resolution of this character had been referred to the Committee on Privileges a.nd Elections until the la.st session of Congress, when, at the suggestion of the chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary, a similar resolution was referred to that committee. No debate was hnu at that time, and no objection was made.

If it is to be the policy of the Senate in the future to refer resolutions providing for amendments to the Constitution on questions relating to elections to the Committee on the Judiciary rather than to the Committee on Privileges and Elections. I think it ought to be fully understood, so that there may be no confusion whatever.

The Committee on Privileges and Elections during these 40 years has been presided over by men like Sena.tor Morton of Indiana, from the year 1872 to 1877, followed by l\:Ir. Wadleigh until 1880; by Mr. Saulsbury, from 1880 to 1881; by Mr. · Hoar, from 1882 to 18V3, a period of 11 years; by Mr. Vance, from 1893 to 1894; by l\[r. Gray, from 18D4 to 1805; by Mr. Mitchell of Oregon, from 1896 to 1897 ; by Senator Chandler of New Hampshire, from 1807 to 1901; and from 1901 to 1911 by the former Senator from Michigan, Mr. Burrows.

During that period a number of different resolutions of this character have been referred to that committee. Elaborate reports have been made upon them, some favorable and some adverse. Were it not for the fact that, through an inadvertence, during the last session a similar resolution went to the Committee on the Judiciary, I do not think any question as to the reference of this joint resolution would have been raised. But that resolution went to the Committee on the Judiciary, received the consideration of that committee, was reported and debated, and now at this session several resolutions introduced into this body have also been referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, while the House joint resolution was referred to the Committee on Privileges and Elections.

Mr. CULBERSON. Mr. President--

The VICE PRESIDENT. Does the Senator from V.ermont yield to the Senator from Texas?

Mr. DILLINGHAM. Certainly.

Mr. CULBERSON. Mr. President, in order that the facts from the record may go in with the statement of the Senator from Vermont, I will ask his leave to say that I have a memorandum, furnished by the Assistant Librarian of the Senate, which shows that since 1871 out of 22 resolutions on this subject which have been presented and referred, 3 of them have been referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, the first in 1886, the next in 1898, and then the one to which the Senator from Vermont has just now alluded. I simply make that as a statement from the record of the Senate itself.

Mr. DILLINGHAM. What became of the other 19 resolutions?

.Mr. CULBERSON. They were referred to the Committee on Privileges and Elections.

.l\Ir. DILLINGHAM. Yes. Mr. President, as I stated in the beginning, so far as I am concerned personally it makes very little difference to which committee the joint resolution shall be referred, as I am a member of both of these committees, but I did think it better that before this motion should be · adopted the Senate should be fully informed of the action of the Senate during the 40 years I have mentioned.

Mr. BAILEY. Mr. President, in my judgment every pro­ . posed amendment to the Constitution ought to be considered by the Judiciary Committee of the Senate, and the fact that such resolutions as this have heretofore been referred to the Committee on Privileges and Elections does not affect my judgment in that respect. It happens now to be true that the Committee on Privileges and Elections is composed of lawyers, and that is always apt to be the case; but if a resolution of this character must go to that committee, then an amendment of some other character would be referred to the committee supposed to have jurisdiction over that subject. The other committees may or may not be composed of lawyers, and yet I hardly think that any Senator will gravely doubt the advisability, not to say the wisdom, of having matters so vital as proposed amendments to the Constitution considered by the Judiciary Committee of the Senate. That committee always has been and is now composed of excellent lawyers, and it is · to be hoped that it will always include in its membership the ablest lawyers of this body.

Without intending to invite any debate on another question, I am moved to say that if the amendment to the Constitution proposing an income tax had been subjected to the scrutiny of the Committee on the Judiciary it would not have since its submission been subjected to some of the arguments which have been urged against it. That circumstance, concurring with what I believe to be general propriety, moves me to believe that the motion of my colleague [Mr. CULBERSON] ought to be adopted; and I say that the more readily because, unlike the Senator from Vermont [Mr. DILLINGHAM], I am not a member of both committees . I am a member of the committee to which the joint resolution has been referred, and I am not a member of the committee to which, in my judgment, it ought to be referred.

The VICE PRESIDE.!. :rT . The question is on agreeing to the motion of the Senator from Texas [Mr. CULBERSON] the joint resolution to the Committee on the Judiciary.

The motion was agreed to. ·