Mr. CRAGIN. The Senator says in 1794. At that time, under the old constitution of NewJersey, this provision was in that constitution: "The Council and Assembly jointly, at their 1st meeting yearly, shall elect by a majority of votes. n Governor; and thntjudges. Attorneys general. trons nrer and other officers shall be appointed by the connyiiland General Assembly in the manner afore lai. That is by a majority vote. Then at the time this law was passed, in 1794, there was a provision in the constitution of NewJersey requiring a majority for the election by the Legislature or by this convention of a Governor and other officers named and other officers not named. Therefore I say it is clear to my mind that the Legislature, in 1794, when they passed the law authorizing the convention to appoint a Senator, without saying whether it slionld be by a majority or otherwise, had in view this constitutional provision which required a majority vote in this convention, an therefore it was not necessary to specify in that law that the Senator should be elected by a majority, for the constitution provided that the elections in this joint convention should be by majorities. This constitution continued in existence down to 1845, and this law in relation to the election of Senators has never been changed. Therefore I say that in my judgment it was the clear intention and purpose of the Legislature that passed this law that the Senator should be appointed by a majority of the convention. That is the point that I wished more particularly to bring out. I agree entirely with the arguments that have been made, that in the absence of a law providing for an election by a plurality, the inn jority rule prevails in alicases. If the Senfrom NewJersey was right when he said that if there had been a law upon the statute book requiring ainajority this convention could not have elected by a plurality, then I say that that convention could not make such a rule. If it could not repeal a law of the State, how has it this whole subject under its control and the right to say by what number of votes it man shall be appointed Senator? If they could say that he could be appointed by a vlurality they might just as well say that he might be selected by ot, or by a committee appointed who should designate a name and that individual be declared elected. But, sir, I did not rise to make any extended remarks.