Mr. SHERMAN. I think myself that we should have uniformity in the mode of electing Senators of the U.S., if possible, but practically it will be very inconvenient to prescribe one rule to affect the action of 36 different political bodies. Some difficultiesoccur to me in reducing this to practice, which I think ought to be considered. Many of the Legislatures are elected bicnnially; it is so in my own State and in many of the States. Some of them are elected 2 years before the vacancy occurs. Under this bill the Legislature would be compelled to elect at least 15 or 18 months in some of the States before the vacancy occurs. This may be convenient sometimes, but at other times it may be very inconvenient. It may be better to postpone the election until near the time of the vacancy, or it may be wise when the Legislature convenes to act on the subject. That depends on circumstances. Now, to prescribe a uniform rule to compel the Legislature to act at a particular time in every case might be very unwise. Then there is another objection made by the Seuator'from Kentucky, [Mr. GUTHRIE] which it seems to me has a good deal of force. You stop all the proceedings of the Legislature until they act on the question of electing a U.S. Senator. It is the interest of every State to have a Senator and there will always be a strong inclination in every State to have that election disposed of. because it generally stands in the way of public business; at is it wise for Congress by an arbitrary enactment to prevent a Legislature from doin any business until this question is dispose of? It seems to me it is better to leave it to the Legislature. Practically there has been but very little dif ficulty in this matter since the foundation of the Government. It is always the interest of every State to elect a member of the Senate; but where the 2 Houses disagree there is sometimes a vacancy until the matter can be submitted to the people. I do not think that practice has resulted in any evil. The various States elect in different modes. In my State they elect by joint convention and by ballot. I would much prefer to substitute the viva. voce voting for the ballot, but I see no reason for having an additional mode of electing before the joint convention; that is the election by the separate Houses. It is a complexmode. I know our people mld be accustomed to it. The rst vote preseribeylby this bill may disclose a difference between the 2 Houses; and then how easy will it be for a portion of each House to prevent an election. Suppose after the 1st effort has been made to elect by a separate vote, theygo into joint convention, how easy it will be to organize a 3rd party, such as exists in almost every election of U.S. Senator. It is very rare that one man on the 1st ballot would get the requisite majority. How easy then to organize a 3rd party, composed say of a few men holding the balance of power between 2 rival parties, and thus stop the legislature of the State from doing any kind 0 business, thus giving a few men combining together the power to control the majority or else to stop all the business of the Legislature. Is not that a possible and a probable contingency? Has it not occurred over and over again? such things have occurred in several States. In my State a small minority of 6 men have by simply holding out compelled the majority to yiel. If, in addition to the ordinary power of such a small minority, they have the power to stop all action by the Legislature upon all legislative business, is it not a verygreat power? If we pass this bill a Legislature could on y elect a Senator in the mode prescribed, because this bill will be passed in pursuance of an express provision of, the Constitution, and when we step in and prescribe the mode of electing a Senator, the Legislature has no right to vary that mode; and therefore, under the language of this bill, the whole proceedings of the Legislature must stop until either this minority faction is bought off, or got off, or yielded to; and thus the will of the people in the election of the Legislature may be defeated. I think it is much better to leave the mode and manner of electin Senators to the ople of the States themse ves through their legislaturc, to allow the Legislature, i necessary, to change the law or modify itto suit the exi ency. It makes no difference to the U.S.; it is only a question as to the mode and manner ofelecting a Senator. I think it is better for us, on a question so important as this, to follow the example of those who have gone before us, as for 70 years we have had no substantial trouble, only occasionally a vacancy from a State. I thin it is better to run the risk of an occasional vacancy in a State, an occasional disagreement, rather than to prescribe by an arbitrary rule a mode which may sometimes be defeated by a small minority, and thus sto the whole legislative business of the State. This is the view that occurs to me. I would not be willing to vote for this bill with my impressions. If a bill is to be adopted, I would be in favor of striking out the intermediate vote by separate Houses, and coming directly to the joint vote viva 11006 at once, so that there will be no chance for combination, because it seems to me this preliminaryvote (which is entirely new to me, but I am told is adopted in some of the States,) will invite just such combinations as will tend to prevent an election and postpone all legislative business by disclosing, in advance, the preference of every member of both branches of the Legislature.