f !? TF"i
"BE-? 1!p!. v
K
i
14
The Commoner.
VOLUME 11, NUMBER 21
PTjae'
It-
Election of Senators by the People
Shall a Sectional Bugbear Defeat a National Demand?
(By Former Congressman William
H. Fleming, Augusta, On.)
Under the- United States constitu
tion, as drafted In 1787, the election
of senators was vested In the state
legislatures, with the accompanying
power In the federal congress to alter
theso state regulations as to the time
and manner of holding the elections,
oxcopting only as to the place of
choosing tho senators the locality
heing left for each state alone to fix.
In 1866 the federal congress exer
cised this power and prescribed tho
times and manner of elections pf
senators by state legislatures and
that law has been in force to tho
present day.
In recent years the senate fell so
much under tho control of special
interests, and became so unrespon
sive to public opinion, especially In
framing tariff legislation, that an
urgent demand arose for this body to
be brought closer to the people and
froed from tho domination of ma
chine politics.
The method fixed upon for accom
plishing this object (whether wise or
unwise, need not bo discussed now),
was to take tho election of senators
away from the state legislators and
give it to the state voters at tho polls.
After years of persistent battling,
this reform movement gradually won
Its way under the special champion
ship of tho democratic party.
As was perfectly natural in this
process of evolution, the senators
themselves held out longest against
the popular demand. But finally
these gentlemen unstiffened their
necks, and on Juno 12, 1911, agreed
by formal vote of 64 to 24 to submit
their claims hereafter directly to the
voters of their respective states.
Tho triumph of tho cause of the
people was complete almost.
But at tho critical juncture of
framing the proposed constitutional
amendment, a new issue was in
jected, one that had not been dis
cussed before the people and one
that formed no paTt of the popular
demand for the direct election of
senators.
This new issue was the surrender
ing by the federal congress of Its
control, unquestioned since the foun
dation of tho government, over sena
torial elections as to the time and
manner of holding them.
The house joint resolution, passed
early in the present session, was so
drawn as to couple the popular elec
tion of senators with the surrender
of all pre-existing federal control
over the such elections.
When this house resolution came
before the senate on June 12, 1911,
that body, by what is known as the
Bristow amendment, changed the
resolution so as to retain in the
federal congress the power it had
always possessed over the times and
manner of holding elections for
senators, but voted In favor of direct
election by tho people.
The Bristow amendment conferred
no now power on the federal con
gress it simply reasserted an old
power.
The house refused to" concur in the
senate amendment, and the re'solu-
Ropp's New Calculator and
Short-Cut Arithmetic
REVISED
ENLARGED AND
IMPROVED
I $K55l,'oSiJI'lJ1 L,Mw'JMj
(100 Pages, Size 0x334)
The correct answer
instantly found to all
practical problems that
occur In the Store, Shop,
Farm, Hank or OHce.
Has more than twice
the capacity of former
editions.
Will Prevent Mis
takes, relieve the mind,
save labor, time, money
nnd do your figuring; in
tho twinkling: of an eye.
As handy nnd useful
as a watch j always
ready and reliable.
This is unquestionably tho most complete
and convenient Work on figures, for practical
use, over published. It contains nearly all tho
short cuts known. Hundreds of simple rules
and oTlRlntil methods for "Easy and Rapid
Calculation. " nnd m lllnna . a r
to business examples and practical problems,
LiVory ono who prefers tho simplest, shortest
ana ensiest Way for doing his work should pos
sess a copy of this useful and convenient
Pocket Manual. It will enable anybody to be
come proficient and quick in flguros. This
book is handsomely bound in cloth, well print
ed, and is sold regularly at CO cents per copy.
OUR BIG BARGAIN OFFER
Send BO cents, cash, monoy order or check,
for a two-year subscription to The American
Homestead, and you will deceive a copy of
Ilopp's New Commercial Calculator. FRT3TO
POSTAGE PREPAID, if you use tho coupon!
We arp making this big offer to get thou
sands of now readers acquainted with the
value of Tho American Homestead a farm and
household paper useful alike to peoplo of citv
town or country. Wo aro determined alao to
receive the prompt renewal of every prcaont
subscriber. m
Now Is tho time to send In your subscrip
tion. Everyone who accepts this offer within
the next twenty days will receive a copy of
this great book. If you are a subscriber now
your date of expiration will bo advanced two
years. Book and paper sent to different ad
dresses If desired. This offer sent tq as many
addresses as desired at 60 cents ach y
THE AMERICAN HOMESTEAD, Liaeols,, Neb
SEND THIS COUPON TODAY
The American Homestead. Lincoln, Neb.
Gentlemen: Enclosed find 50c to pay for
Tho American Homestead for two years, and
a copy of Ropp's New Commercial Calculator.
Freo and postpaid.
Name
P. O..
maxxsaxsastsuxmam
MTmygruwuiv
('ihls Coupon good for 20 days only)
tlon went to conference, where it
now rests.
Some able speeches have been de
livered on this subject notable
among them being that of Senator
Bacon on February 10 and 27, 1911,
when the Sutherland amendment,
similar in effect to the Bristow
amendment, was pending in the
senate.
It clearly appears from the dis
cussions that the real ground of
objection to tho retention of its
former power by congress over the
times and manner of holding elec
tions for senators is the fear of some
of our southern congressmen that at
some future day this power may be
used to jeopardize white supremacy
in tho south.
Let us calmly consider the situa
tion in a broad spirit of American
citizenship.
What right in morals or in poli
tics have we southern peoplo to ex
pect that senators from northern and
western states will yield up a federal
power over senatorial elections more
than a century old, in order to get
enough southern votes to pass the
constitutional amendment for direct
election of senators?
When did they ever make so one
sided a trade?
With what show of reason can we
southern democrats make our obedi
ence to this popular demand, and our
loyalty to our specific platform
pledge, dependent upon the trading
off by the north and west of a na
tional power existing since 1787?
No such condition was forecasted in
the campaign before the people.
Should not our southern demo
cratic congressmen have some con
sideration for their northern and
western democratic brethren who
will be compelled in the next elec
tion to. attempt a defense before the
people of a' position which we must
admit is indefensible from the stand
point of those sections? Theso
northern and western democratic
candidates will be, on this particu
lar iSSUe. at thf mpvnv nf fl,?
w - --- w v. L1JV711 VJIJ
ponents. The more they will be con
vinced that the northern and west
ern senators were right in not" ac
cepting the terms offered, The
peoplo will not forget that in the last
campaign the solo issue upon 'this
Subject was the popular election' of
senators and not the surrender of
federal power.
The minfiHrvn nf fim 4,w7,i i...--,
or state control of senatorial elec
tions, is not entirely new in fact it
is quite old: It was voted upon
directly in the constitutional conven
tion of 1,787.
In the draft of the constitution as
reported by the general ' committee
on August 6, 1787, the provision re
lating to congressional elections read
as follows:
v "J?1 Jiraes Peaces and manner of
holding the elections of the members
of each house shall be prescribed by
"u. 6"ioLure OI each state, but
their provisions concerning them
may at any time be altered by the
legislature of tho United States."
A motion Was Tnnrlr rn A.,i. ft
1787, to amend, by striking out the
words "each house," and inserting
the words "the house of representa
tives --thus apparently eliminating
federal control over senatorial elec
tions. In the quaint but pointed
language of the chronicler, this mo
tion "passed in the negative "
The tolly sheet of the convention
shows that only one state, namely
New Jersey, voted in favor of that
amendment, while 10 states voted
against It, namely, New Hampshire
Massachusetts, Connecticut, Pennsyl
vania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia
North Carolina, South Carolina and
Georgia not voting, Rhode Island
and New York.
It thus appears that all the south
ern states, as represented by the men
of that day, saw no wisdom in mak
ing any distinction between repre
sentatives and senators as to federal
control of elections.
It is also significant that tho
single reservation of power to the
states to fix the places of choosing
senators, as it now exists, was never
separately discussed or voted upon
in the open convention; but got into
the constitution only throueh th pp.
I port of the committee on "revision
or style and arrangement," made on
September 8, 1787, when the session
was drawing to a close
So it appeaTs historically that the
present position of southern demo
crats in demanding this surrender of
federal power as a condition to per
mitting popular elections of senators,
is a most embarrassing one and tho
embarrassment will continue to in
crease as the next congressional cam
paign proceeds.
But again, as a question of poli
tical philosophy, our position would
be equally assailable. It is rudimen
tary that every permanent national
government should have final power
of self-perpetuation, and not be de
pendent for, its existence on indepen
dent agencies.
A majority of the states could,
under the house resolution, without
the Bristow amendment, "destroy
the government and dissolve tho
union by simply declining to appoint
senators" to employ an illustration
used by John C. Calhoun in his dis
course on the constitution and gov
ernment of tho United States.
It is true, one side may ask why
guard against such an improbability?
But the ready answer of the other
side is, why surrender an existing
power that prevents even the possi
bility of such a contingency?
Again, look at the discordant com
plications that might arise. Of
course, congress, in either event, is
to retain its power over elections for
representatives. Now if th6 state is
to be given sole power over elections
for senators, we will have the un
seemly spectacle of two elections
proceedings before the same body of
voters, perhaps on the same day, for
members of the same congress, one
for members of the house subject
to federal control, and the other for
members of the senate, subject to
state control. Where is the logic
or philosophy for that difference?
If this proposed amendment to the
constitution bringing the senate in
direct touch with the people shall be
finally rejected in the house on the
plea now set up, there will be no
escape for southern representatives
from the responsibility of defeating
this great reform movement of which
the democratic party has been the
avowed champion. Think of how
poor an excuse we will have to offer
for such a complete change of front.(
Some may doubt the wisdom of
changinc the election of Rfmators
from the legislators to the voters at
the polls, but this much can be safely
said; that of all the new political
remedies for existing evils this one
carries with It the greatest possi
bility of good and the least prob
ability of harm. It in no wise affects
the political status of a state under
the constitution. It merely elimi
nates the legislature as a sort of
middle-body or machine between the
people and the senate. State entity
remains absolutely unimpaired so for
as constitutional provisions can keii
it so.
When three republican presidents,
McKinley, Roosevelt and Taft, hay
braved party prejudice and exhibited
a statesmanship nation-wide in its
scope, how can we southern demo
crats afford to display a narrow sec
tionalism that would sacrifice the na
tional welfare to vague and vanish-
InE fears Of TiPP-rn HnmlnnHnti? Wfl
are the weaker section numerically
1 nnA fllll rr,. - .r
wuu nuuuuiiuiy. ineretore, our saxoi
i
Si,:
H-.
Ufifv" -
t
imyrtm
.i?ii'.
