The PRESIDENT protempore. The Chair will put the question. It is suggested that the unfinished business of yesterday be laid aside by common consent, informally, in order that the discussion may proceed upon th bill that was before the Senate at the expirat on of the morning hour. Is there any obJcction to that course? No objection being made, that will be the understandin, and the bill that was laid aside is now before the Senate as in ComWhole, being the bill (S.No.414) to reg ulate the time and manner of holding elections for Senators in Congress, Mr. SUMNER. [was impressed by a remark of the Senfrom Illinois, to the effect that while we were undertaking to regulate the election of Senators it would be well that we should require, in all respects, uniformity. I was impressed by that remark, for it seemed to me that it presents a key to this whole ques‘tion. If this be in reality the key, if it be of importance to require uniformity in all respects, then it seems to me we ought to prescribe in all respects the manner of the election. Nothing should be left uncertain. This, I understand, the bill now before us undertakes to do. The proposition of the Senfrom Maine, if adopted, would leave the manner of election in one particular open to the caprice of each Legislature, so that one Legislature might act in one way and another in another way. One might choose Senators by an open vote, and another by a secret vote. Now, sir, I remark, in the 1st place, that it seems to me there should be uniformity. The question then is, which system shall be adopted, tie system of open voting or the system of secret voting? “P at popular elections the system of secret voting is preferable, and that every citizen, when about to give his vote at any such election, has a right to the protection of secrecy, I do not see my way to that conclusion with regard to votes which are given in a representative capacity. such votes do not belong to the individual, if I may so express myself, but belong to his constituents. require that his constituents should be able to see the vote that is given by the representative; but that can be only where the system of open voting is adopted. The argument, then, for open voting by those who vote in a representative capacity seems to me to be unauswerable in prhrmenciptlhee. Senfrom Maine alluded to popular elections among us, which are by secret voting, and contrasted it with the system adopted in England for the election of members of Parliament, he adduced an example which does not seem to me to be applicable. The votin for members of Parliament is at a popular election, and there, according to the prmciple I have already recognized, it seems to me that the voter is entitled to the protection of secrecy; but if I may continue the allusion to England, when the representative comes to vote in Parliament, then it seems to me he should so vote that his constituents should see what he does. What is the recedent that we may derive from England? Vbile in the election of members 0 Parliament there is open voting, we see also that in elections by Par iament itself as for instance in the choice of Speaker there is open voting, or voting by viva voce.