Mr. Buchanan was elected and the House in its separate capacity had determined that no one was electe, the Constitution requires that the House, thereu on, shall proceed imme diately, yes, imme iately is the command of the Constitution, without the concurrence of the Senate, to choose a President. Then comes the terrible peril in which this country will be involved, the ordeal through which it will have to pass where the HoRep dete ine one way and the Senate the other. ot mean to say it is not within our der the Constitution to provide a tribunal; upon that question there is no occasion to remark. I have only to so that as yet no such tribunal hos been provided. On the occasion alluded to by my colleague it was the o inion of learned men both in the House an in the Senate that the country barely ese aped a revolution. They did not decide, as I understood my colleague to say, by passing into then respective Halls whether the vote of Wisconsin should be counted or not: The question was not decided, and ye inains to be decided to this day. After being in convention and Witnessing the opening oi the votes, the Senate of its own motion left this Hall and went into their separate Chamber before the work was completed and there undertook to complete by concurrent action, by JtCommee of the 2 Houses. whatever failed to be done here in the meeting of the 2 bodies, growmg out of the dispute about the Wisconsin vote. But, Mr. Speaker, they failed to accomplish anything. T icir resolution was laid upon the table. So Wltll. a similar resolution in the House. To da it has not been decided whether those votes of Vise onsm should be counted or not. NOw suppose the disputed vote had determined the result and an ose the House differed in its conclusion with the Senate of the U.S., and the House elected one man President and the Senate declared that another man was elected. It needs no argument and no suggestion from me to show the House the peril in which the nation would have been involved, and all lihlS in a timeof comparative peace. That is one objection I have to the 3rd section in the proposed amendment of the Constitution unless you erect some tribunal to decide the question which may be made. It increases that peril by increasing the danger of a contest, and at a time, too, when there is not yet peace. The embers of war are still glowing. Still, as I said be fore, I am disposed to, vote for it if that cannot be stricken out, but I will give it my hearty support, and so will every loyal heart, if not embarrassed by that clause. 1 Let me read, if I have a moments time, what was said by a distinguished gentleman who has since been Governor of his State, Mr. Washburn, of Maine, when the peace of our country came so nigh being disturbed by the Wisconsin case: "The Constitution provides that the President of the Senate.in the presenceof the 2 Houses shall open all certificates and that the votes shall be counted and the person having the greatest number of votesfor President shall be POTUS if such number be a majority of the whole numberof electorsappointed; and soin regard to the VEEP. The votes shall be opened in the presenceof the Senate and HoRep and then counted. Bywhom) The roisno provision of the Constitution, or of law. that they shall becountedby the Senateor the House or by ojoint convention. There has been no joint convention. nor could there have beep any. The assemblagehere could do nothing for which it had not the authority of law and there is no law authorizing the count of thesevotesby ajolnt convention or rescribing the rules and regulation to beobserved t crciu. It was the duty of the President of the Senate here.in the presenceof the 2 Houses, to open the certificates and to cause the votes to be counted. The Houses had directed how they were to becounted.by a tell er appointed on the part of the Senate and 2 tellers appointedon the part of the House. These tellers madethe count and hero.in the presenceof us all mad their report to the president of those nato: and the resident of the Senate.in the presenceof a 2 Houses and in exact conformitywith the provisions of the Constitution. did declare the whole iptuy.mbNoortohfivnegtes and did declare who had themine r but that could have beendone. There wasnofiower on the part of the Senate area the part of the ease.to interfere with the execution of this dut preciselyas specilied in the Constitution and in the resolution of the the 2 Houses. “I d therefore. that no motionwhatevercanbe made and that the meeting.under the Constitution, the law of 1792 and the ioint resolution is qflicro. fundin I have no doubt.Sll, that there is herese um omimui; that there is no law and no provision of the Constitution by which anything can possibly be done exceptwhat has been done by the resident of the senatein presenceof the 2 Houses. I hold that he ruled aritiwhonherefusedto entertainthomotions madeto im and when he announcedfromthochair in presenceof the Senate and to the House. what h eeu declaredto him by the tellers. That is all thntho did and all that he had authority todo. Iain, at the sometime, very clear that it is of the highestiuiporh tancethatthore should be some legislation on this subject. All that we can now do is to acquiese ein the decisionthat has beenmade and to set ourselves to. work immediately for the pass c of a law which will prevent any trouble or diflien ty of this kind in future. I received a lette rbut a few dayspgo from a gentleman eniinent for hisWisdomandability, who statestherein thutihc late Chancellor Kent. of NewYork. had told him that here was clcurl a enou OWIUHFLM. that there wasno power.either in t or iellouse parsteicriiopuaste, or in a Joint convention. to interfere and authoritatively lncounting and declaring the votesand deciding upon their validity: and he smaiigdht the aotm thee Chancellor added tha the fearedthetimo when the country would beshakento its centeron this point.” Mr. Seward and Mr. Collnmer in the Senate, on the same occasion, expressed similar views, each declaring the impoteuc of the 2 Houses or any tribunal known to the law to solve the difficulty, and at the same time each rejoicing at the ese ape from peril which the immateriulity of the vote in question had secured, but pointing out the terrible danger to which the nation would be exposed if ever a material vote in the Electoral College should be questioned. [Here the hammer fell.] EVENING SESSIONS.