Mr. BUCKALEW. I shall not call for the yeas&nays on the passage of this bill, although I am opposed to its enactment. I suppose, however, there would be no advantage in causing its postponement, as I suppose the majority will pass it whenever a quorum shall be Present. I think it is questionable whether a law of this sort ought to be enacted to bind the action of a future Congress. I suppose that a new HoRep when it is assembled together can act according to its own pleasure. It cannot be bound by any opinion, even if put into the form of a o statute, prior Congress. I think, therefore, if this subject were debated upon principle it might well be held open to strong objections upon this ground. Now, sir, the power of the Clerk of the HoRep to call the roll of the members elect I understand to rest upon usage and upon the acquiescence of the House itself. I do not understand that by a statute of the Present Congress you can control a future Congress with reference to the manner in which they shall act in their organization or in the discharge of any other duty which particularly pertains to it as a House. It seems to me at least doubtful. Resting upon acqui. escence, the practice of having the Clerk call over the roll of members elect is a convenient one. But upon former occasions the authority or power of the Clerk against objection has been denied. I remember that it was strongly denied upon one occasion by John Quincy Adams, and that upon another occasion, where the action of the Clerk was excepted to or his authority denied, one of the members elect was put in the chair for the purpose of organizing the House. Besides, this bill provides that the Clerk shall put upon the roll the name of no member of the House from any State which was not rePresentedin the prior Congress. Suppose you have a new State admitted into the Union under a public law; the mode of electing members for that State is Prescribed by law; members are elected and aree Present in the House. Under a bill of this kind the votes of those members from a new State would be excluded because the State was not rePresented in the prior Congress. Perhaps the organization of the House may depend upon the votes of those very members. Again, it may be supposed that in a particular Congress some State may be unrePresented. There may be some question of contest and no member admitted, and the State thus be unrePresented in the prior Congress. It seems to me that this bill from the House is a crude measure, one of doubtful propriety, one which ought not to be passed; but, as I said before, as this is one of a series of measures directed to the exclusion of rePresentation from the southern States, as it belongs to a class of legislation which seems to be a favor ite one with the HoRep, I Presume that the majority would enact it if a uorum were Present, even upon full debate. for that reason I shall content myself with hinting the reasons or grounds upon which I objected to this bill when it was up last evening, and upon which I shall give a silent vote against it now.