Mr. JOHNSON. I meant the 1st amendment suggested, addin the words “ and organization” after the wor “meeting.” The 1st section of the bill provides that each House is to vote by itself. The Senate are of course aware that in the becinuing and the same opinion continued to lbe entertained a good while after the Constitution was adopte it was very much doubted by some of the best men of the country whether any election could be made by the Legislature in any other way than by the votes of both branches acting concurrentl where the Legislature of the State consiste of 2 bodies. The language of the Constitution is that “the Senate of the U.S shall be composed of 2 Senators from each State, chosen by the Legislature thereof.” I do not speak with certainty, but either Chan cellor Kent or Mr. Justice Story, in his Commentaries, has said that it was exceedingly doubtful whether the true meaning of that provision is not that the choice is to be made by the Legislature legislatively, and of course that they are to act in the way in which they are alone authorized to act by their State constitutions under which they exist in the passing of laws. Whether the doubt was originally well founded I am not prepared to say; I rather think it was; but the States have acted upon a different construction of the Constitution since. They have, however, adopted no uniform rule, and we have seen, upon more than one occa' sion, the embarrassment consequent upon the absence of a uniform rule. It was illustrated in the recent case of the gentleman who supposed himself to by a Senfrom the State of NewJersey. I do not propose, of course, to argue that question again; but that was a difficult question, in the judgment of a great many; the Senate were nearly equally divided on the matter; and I think every member of the Senate who reflects upon the circumstances of that case, and the actual and honest differences of opinion which prevailed among our selves, must have come to the conclusion that it is very desirable to adopt some uniform rule if we can do it. This bill proposes to adopt a uniform rule; it places it out of the power of the States to adopt any other; and not only that, but it makes it the imperative duty of the States to elect according to this prescribed rule. Now, my friendfrom Ohio says that the bill is very objectionable, in providing that where the Houses fail to agree upon a Senator, they are to meet in joint meeting and to do nothing else as a Legislature until a Senator is elected. That instead of being an objection, recom' men' s the bill to me. The Government of the U.S. cannot go on without a representation in the Senate of the U.S., The Constitution assumes that every State in the Union will elect Senators; and the Constitution in its spirit is obligatory upon every State to make such an election. The only way, as I think, to compel the States to perform that constitutional obligation is to stop the wheels of the government of the State until thathi her duty is performed. It is infinitelya higher duty upon the part of the States and the members of the Legislatures of the several States to elect Senators of the U.S., the Government of the U.S. being important to all the States, than it is to go on with their ordinary legislation. The wheels of the government of the State may be stopped, and the business of the country may not be injured, the character of the country may not in any manner be affected, the power of the Government may in no manner be diminished b that; but all 0t this is, or may be, the result 0afail ure to elect Senators to the Congress of the U.S. It is no penalty at all which provides that the Legislatures are to remain in session until they make the election. It is merely prescribing that as a duty. They are subjected to no penalty for not performing it. They are brought together merely by this bill and told, “The business of your legislature is to be arrested until this paramount duty which you owe to the Constitution of the U.S. is performed of electing a Senator to represent your State in the Senate of the U.S.” Not only is the particular State interested in having that duty performed, but every State is interested. I have as much interest in having the State of Ohio represented upon this floor as in having my own State represented. I am not here as the representative of Maryland, nor is the Senfrom Ohio here as the representative of Ohio. We represent our respective States because we represent all the States; and it is our duty, and the same duty, to take care of the interests of all as to take care of the interests of ourown State; and (to stuteit in other words) we do take care of the interests of our respective States when we take care of the interests of all, for we are bound altogether, to stand or to fall together, as we generally and not individually prosper. As as already been said, there can be no doubt about the authority to pass the bill before the Senate, and I have no doubt that the framers of the Constitution anticipated as very possible that the time would come when it would become necessary for Congress to interfere in this matter. They would not have made the provision except on account of an anticipation that the necessitv for its exercise would subsequently arise. They therefore said in the Constitution that “the times, places, and manner of holding elections for Senators ” “shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time, by law, make or alter such regulations except as to the place of choosing Senators.” The selection oft e place they left entirely to the authority of the State; but as to how they shall elect the Senator, what regulations shall be prescribed for that purpose, the Constitution provided should be (if congress should see proper to exercise the power afterward) decided upon by Congress. Why put that provision in the Constitution? Is it not obvious that it was inserted for the purpose of accomplishing some uniform regulation ‘? Congress cannot adopt partial regulations, regulations“ to be enforced in Maine, and different regulations to be enforced in Maryland. The regulations which Congress are authorized to pass, and are only authorized to pass, are regulations which are to appl equally to all the States. The Convention, therefore, looked to the coming of a period when different regulations might exist in the several States, or no regulation might exist, which would render it the duty of Congress with a view to the interest and the safety of the Government, to guard against the mischief consequent upon the ab sence of regulations, or the existence of improger regulations, to provide for both cases. s to the objection stated b my friendfrom Ohio, that this bill will enable some factions minority of each branch to defeat an election, they can do it now; they have done it, accordingto his own statement. It has liapened in Ohio; it has happened in Tennessee; it has hap ened in 2 or 3 other States. I think it appened in my own Statein relation to one Senator. The existence of that was a mischief, an admitted evil. It cannot happen under the provisions of this bill, because it is incumbent on the Legislature to meet on a certain day and act, each House in its separate legislative capacity, and failin to accomplish the end, then it is made their duty to meet in joint meeting on the subsequent day, and there continue in session until they do elect, all other business being arrested. It appears to me I thought so in committee, and I have but been confirmed in the opinion since that it is the interest of the Government and in a great measure the‘safet of the government that this bill or some bil like it should become a law.