Mr. DAVIS. I do not perceive, myself, any necessity, or even propriety, for any legislation upon this subject; but if Congress is to pass any measure on the subject, I see no good sense in prescribing 2 rules for the government of the clect on, one to take place on the 1st day and a different rule to be a licable to the next or any subsquent day. I understand the bill, on the 1st day the 2 Houses vote separately, and on the 2nd day the meet together in convention, and the Jouru of the 2 Houses of the 1st day are to be read, and if upon reading the Journals of the‘two Houses, on the 2nd day, it is ascertained that anyone man has received a majority of the votes of each House, he is to be declared to be the duly elected Senator; but if, on the contrary, no man has received a majority of the votes of each Hpuse, the 2 Houses then act as a joint convention and proceed to the election of a Senator, upon the principle that if any man receives a majority of the aggregate vote of both Houses in this joint convention he is to be the Senator. I think the last is the simplest rule and most practical. That rule would always, or nearly always, result in the choice of a Senator. The rule, though provided here for controllin the election on the 1st day, practically would not produce an election at all, because it would often occur that the same man would not get a majority of the votes of each House. Why, then, postpone the election from the 1st to the secomor subsequent day? Why not adopt the rule for the 1st day’s voting that is adopted for the subsequent day’s voting, and proceed to an election upon the simplest rule and in the shortest time practicable? I suppose that in many cases it would result in no election whatever on the 1st day, and that the convention of the 2 Houses that is provided for would necessarily be required; and in all cases where the convention ecame necessary, the simple rule of electing upon joint ballot, and he who received the majority of the whole vote upon joint ballot being elected, would be adopted. I am in favor of adopting it for the 1st day’s Operation. qr My colleague stated correctly what has been the practice of our Legislature from the beginning of the State, and it seems to me that that is a simple, certain, and equitable mode of making the election. It does not introduce the confusion of bringing the 2 Houses into one Chamber and there having a commingled vote, but its practicalcflect is the same. The two Houses vote separately for whom they please. They interchange messages; and upon the in terchange of messages, if it is found that any candidate has received a majority of the aggre gate vote ofboth Houses, he is declared elected. I do not believe that mode or principle of election can be improved. If the ‘enate is to legislate on the subject at all, I think with my colleague, that that mode and principle of election onIht to be prescribed. concur in another objection made by my colleague to this measure. When the 2 Houses have met in convention no legislative business can proceed until an election is ef fected. We do not know what inconveniences such a rule might introduce until it is tested by experience; but we may well imagine great difficulty and great delay in making an election at all. It might be that the 2 Houses in joint meeting would have to proceed for a series of consecutive days in ineffectual efforts to make an election, because no single candidate Would receive a majority of the whole number of votes cast, and not only the whole number of votes cast, but what is a proper principle, I think, a majority of the wholb number of votes in the 2 Houses of the Legislature in the aggregate. To suspend the course of business until an election is effected upon that principle might at least seriously obstruct the legisative proceedings of the States, and in that point of view, I think, it is objectionable. I believe, myself, that this subject might as well be left entirely to the action of the State Legislature; but if Congress is determined to take up the subject and to pass a law upon it, I think the law might be in a better form than this bill is, and I hope it may be the pleasure of the Senate to refer the bill back to the ComJudiciary, and that that committee may adopt the plain, simple rule of requiring a majorit of the whole number of members of both cases, either by a separate vote or upon a joint ballot, and' declaring that the man who receives such a vote as that shall be the Senator elect.